GIFT   ©F 
Fessenden 


From  Portrait  by  Wright,  LS,»G. 


EV-/ 


COPYRIGHT,  1910, 
BY  WALTER  G.  SHOTWELL. 


- 


PEEFACE 

I  SUPPOSE  it  will  be  conceded  that  the  most  interesting  period 
of  the  history  of  the  United  States  is  that  leading  up  to,  covered 
by,  and  following  the  Civil  War.  The  nation  "  conceived  in  lib 
erty  and  dedicated  to  the  proposition  that  all  men  are  created 
equal,"  in  its  brief  existence  of  fourscore  years  had  made  an  un 
exampled  growth  in  population  and  material  prosperity.  It  had 
gathered  about  it  the  pride  and  the  hopes  of  millions  of  patri 
otic  people.  The  questions  for  solution  were  whether  the  na 
tion  could  continue  to  exist  and  whether  the  fundamental 
principle  of  its  organization  could  be  maintained.  These  were 
great  questions. 

In  the  discussion  of  them  it  was  natural  that  great  interest 
should  be  shown  and  that  as  the  contest  warmed  great  passions 
should  be  enlisted.  The  battles  of  the  period  were  all  fought 
in  Congress  and  on  the  stump  before  they  were  transferred  to 
the  field.  They  developed  a  race  of  orators  and  statesmen, 
commencing  with  Webster,  Calhoun  and  Clay  and  ending  with 
Lincoln,  Sumner  and  Douglas,  that  has  never  been  equalled. 
I  purpose  to  write  the  life  of  one  of  these  men. 


M94889 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I                                          PAGE 
Birth — Ancestry — Father  and  Mother 1 

CHAPTER  II 
Youth  of  Sumner — Early  School  Days — Father  made  Sheriff 7 

CHAPTER  III 

Enters  Harvard  College — Dislike  for  Mathematics — Deportment — 
Popularity — Friends — Excursion  to  Lake  Champlain— Societies — 
Class  Standing 11 

CHAPTER  IV 

Undecided  as  to  Profession — Prize  Essay — Work  of  Year  after  Gradua^ 
tion— Enters  Harvard  Law  School — Industry — Friendship  of 
Professors 18 

CHAPTER  V 

Law  Practice— Editing  "The  Jurist" — Other  Publications — Instruc 
tor  in  Law  School—"  The  Five  of  Clubs" 27 

CHAPTER  VI 

Trip  to  Europe— Opposition  of  Friends— Motives  for  taking  it— Voy 
age — France — Learning  French— Schools — Courts— Assemblies. .  32 

CHAPTER  VII 

London— The  Clubs— Parliament— The  Courts— The  Judges— Society 
— Macaulay,  Carlyle,  Hallam — Services  for  Friends — Circuits — 
London  again 46 

CHAPTER  VIII 

Paris  again — Employment — North  East  Boundary — Journey  to  Rome 
— Father's  Death  —  Studies  —  Greene  —  Crawford  —  Florence — 

Venice 80 

V 


Vi  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  IX  PAGE 

Through  Austria— Vienna— Metternich— Berlin— Savigny— Heidel 
berg,  Mittermaier— Thibaut— London  again— Home— Retrospect 
of  TriP 90 

CHAPTER  X 

Friends— Campaign  of  1840— Resumes  Work— Office  of  Hillard  & 
Sumner— Phillips  Match  Case— Right  of  Search— Practice- 
Unprofessional  Studies 97 

CHAPTER  XI 

In  Society— Friends— The  Misses  Ward— Howe— Howe's  Marriage- 
Longfellow,  Prescott,  Bancroft,  Story,  Allston,  Channing,  Adams 
— Their  Influence — His  Habits 108 

CHAPTER  XII 

International  Questions— " The  Caroline" — "  The  Creole" — Slavery 
— "Soiners"  Mutiny— Law  School— Edits  Vesey  Jr.— Sickness 
— Sister  Mary's  Death — At  Work  again 123 

CHAPTER  XIII 

Chosen  Orator  for  July  4,  1845— The  Occasion— The  Oration  on  "  The 
True  Grandeur  of  Nations" — The  Dinner — Estimates  of  Oration 
— Judge  Story's  Death— Sumner's  Tribute 140 

CHAPTER  XIV 

Judge  Story's  Professorship  not  Sought — First  Speech  against  Slavery 
— A  Lyceum  Lecturer— Article  on  Pickering — The  Beta  Kappa 
Oration— Place  as  an  Orator 157 

CHAPTER  XV 

Cause  of  Universal  Peace — Prison  Discipline— Boston  Prison  Dis 
cipline  Society — Equal  Rights  of  Colored  Children  in  Schools — 
Diversions 169 

CHAPTER  XVI 

Admission  of  Texas — Mexican  War — Opposition— Nominated  for  Con 
gress — Declines— Whig  Conventions— Dissatisfaction  with  Old 
Parties — Anti-Slavery  Party — Sumner  a  Speaker — Again  declines 
Nomination  for  Congress — Chairman  of  State  Committee  of  Free 
Soil  Party 180 


CONTENTS  Vii 

CHAPTER  XVII  PAGE 

Loss  of  Friends — Effect  on  Sumner — New  Friendships 203 

CHAPTER  XVIII 

Compromise  of  1850— Webster's  Seventh  of  March  Speech— The  Co 
alition  of  Free-Soilers  and  Democrats — Sumner  a  Candidate  for 
Senator — Elected — Acceptance 216 

CHAPTER  XIX 

Leaving  Boston — First  Days  in  Washington — Welcome  to  Kossuth — 
Aid  to  Railroads — Anxiety  to  speak  on  Slavery — Secures  Hearing 
— The  Speech— George  returns  from  Europe — Vacation 237 

CHAPTER  XX 

Session  1852-3— Member  of  Massachusetts  Constitutional  Convention 
—Campaign  of  1853 — Coalition  defeated — Nebraska  Debate — 
Joins  Republican  Party — Lectures  on  Granville  Sharp 270 

CHAPTER  XXI 

Session  of  1854-5 — Toucey  Bill — Lectures  before  Anti-Slavery  As 
sociations — Visits  South  and  West — Passmore  Williamson — 
Election  of  1855 296 

CHAPTER  XXII 

Stormy  Session  of  1855-6 — Banks,  Republican,  made  Speaker — Kansas 
Troubles — Applies  for  Admission — Sumner's  Speech — The 
Replies— Sumner's  Rejoinder 306 

CHAPTER  XXIII 

Assault  upon  Sumner  by  Brooks — Action  of  Congress — Resignation — 
Re-election  of  Brooks — South  approves  Assault — North  aroused 
—Later  careers  of  Brooks,  Keitt  and  Butler 329 

CHAPTER  XXIV 

Nature  of  Sumner's  Injuries — Goes  to  Silver  Springs,  to  Philadelphia, 
to  Cresson  Springs — Public  Interest  in  Sumner — Public  Reception 
at  Boston — Re-elected — To  Europe  in  search  of  Health — Paris — 
France — England — Travels  and  Friends — Home  again — In  Wash 
ington — Unable  for  Duty — To  Europe  again — Medical  Treat 
ment 342 

CHAPTER  XXV 

Home  again — Friends— In  Senate — Speech  on  "Barbarism  of 
Slavery  "—Campaign  of  1860 384 


yiii  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  XXVI                                   PAGE 
No  Compromise — Secession — Baltimore  Mobs — Emancipation 402 

CHAPTER  XXVII 

"Trent"  Affair — Simmer  urges  Release  of  Mason  and  Slidell — His 
Speech — Appearance  and  Position — Emancipation  again  Advo 
cated — Other  Questions 425 

CHAPTER  XXVIII 

Campaign  of  1862— Third  Election  to  Senate— Session  of  1862-3— 
Advocates  Enlistment  of  Colored  Troops — Compensated  Eman 
cipation 446 

CHAPTER  XXIX 

Dangers  from  England  and  France — Sumner's  work  in  preserving 
Peace — Correspondence — Speech  on  Foreign  Relations — Article 
on  Franklin  and  Slidell 458 

CHAPTER  XXX 

Emancipation — Passage  of  XlVth  Amendment — Equal  Rights — 
Repeal  of  Fugitive  Slave  Law — Sumner's  Persistency — Other 
Measures 473 

CHAPTER  XXXI 

Reconstruction  under  Lincoln — No  Bust  for  Chief  Justice  Taney — 
Negro  Suffrage — Freedmen's  Bureau — Retaliation — Relations  to 
President  Lincoln — Lincoln's  Death 492 

CHAPTER  XXXII 

Reconstruction  under  Johnson — His  Character — Sumner  for  Equal 
Rights — XlVth  Amendment — Sumner  and  President  Johnson — 
Eulogies  on  Colleagues 524 

CHAPTER  XXXIII 
Death  of  Sumner's  Mother — Her  Character— His  Marriage 555 

CHAPTER  XXXIV 

Lecture  "One  Man  Power  against  Congress" — Johnson  against 
XlVth  Amendment— Election  of  1866— Tenure  of  Office  Bill- 
Reconstruction — Purchase  of  Alaska 559 


CONTENTS  ix 

CHAPTER  XXXV  PAGE 

"  Prophetic  Voices  concerning  America  " — Lecture,  "  The  Nation" — 
Leaving  Old  Home  in  Boston— Divorce — New  Home  in  Wash 
ington — Habits— Visitors 584 

CHAPTER  XXXVI 
Impeachment  of  President  Johnson— Sumner's  Opinions 592 

CHAPTER  XXXVII 

New  Political  Issues — Campaign  of  1868 — Grant  Elected— Sumner 
Re-elected  Senator — A.  T.  Stewart  for  Secretary  of  Treasury — 
Fish,  Secretary  of  State— Motley 605 

CHAPTER  XXXVIII 

Eulogies  on  Thaddeus  Stevens  and  Wm.  P.  Fessenden— Undertakes 
Edition  of  his  Works — Changes  in  Naturalization  Laws — Equal 
Rights — Reconstruction  Completed 617 

CHAPTER  XXXIX 

Financial  Measures— One  Cent  Postage — Chinese  Indemnity  Fund — 
Claims  against  England— In  Harmony  with  Grant's  Administra 
tion  629 

CHAPTER  XL 

Continued  Interest  in  Republican  Party— Grant's  Scheme  to  Annex 
San  Domingo — Sumner's  Opposition — Sickness — Removal  from 
his  Committee — Defeats  Annexation 648 

CHAPTER  XLI 

Gratitude  of  Haiti— The  Civil  Rights'  Bill— Sale  of  Arms  to  France- 
Liberal  Republican  Movement — Speech  against  Grant — Opposes 
his  Re-election 674 

CHAPTER  XLII 

Last  Trip  to  Europe — The  Battle  Flag  Bill— Resolution  of  Censure — 
Sickness 694 

CHAPTER  XLIII 

Returns  to  Work — Last  Summer  at  Boston — In  Senate  Again — 
Attends  Dinner  of  New  England  Society  of  New  York — Last 
Days— Death— Eulogies 705 

INDEX..  ,   725 


PORTRAITS 

CHARLES  SUMNER  IN  1856,  AT  THE  HEIGHT  OF  HIS 
EARLIER  CAREER.  FROM  THE  PAINTING  BY 
WIGHT.  Frontispiece 

CHARLES  SUMNER  IN  1873.  FROM  A  PHOTOGRAPH 

BY  ALLEN.  To  face  page  694 


LIFE   OF  CHAKLES  SUMNER 


CHAPTER,  1     o  ,     , r  ; 

BIRTH — ANCESTRY — FATHER — MOTHER 

CHARLES  SUMNER  was  born  in  the  city  of  Boston,  January 
sixth,  1811,  the  child  of  Charles  Pinckney,  and  Relief  Jacobs, 
Sumner.  It  was  a  twin  birth,  the  other  child  being  Matilda. 
The  house  in  which  they  were  born  is  no  longer  standing.  It 
was  in  May,  now  Revere  Street  and  occupied  a  part  of  the 
present  site  of  the  Bowdoin  School.  This  continued  to  be  the 
home  of  the  family  until  1825  or  1826  when  they  removed  to 
what  was  then  No.  53  Hancock  Street,  later  No.  33.  These 
houses  Mr.  Sumner  did  not  own,  but  in  1830  he  purchased  No. 
20  Hancock  Street  and  this  continued  to  be  the  home  of  the 
family  until  1867.  There  were  born  to  the  same  parents,  after 
the  two  that  have  been  mentioned,  seven  children,  Albert, 
Henry,  George,  Jane,  Mary,  Horace  and  Julia,  the  last  being 
the  only  one  to  survive  her  brother  Charles. 

The  Sumner  family  were  from  Oxford  County,  England, 
where  their  ancestor,  William,  who  first  came  to  America  was 
born  in  1604  near  Bicester.  He  settled  at  Dorchester,  Mass.,  in 
1635.  From  him  Charles  Sumner  was  descended  in  the  seventh 
generation,  the  intervening  ancestors  in  the  direct  line  of  de 
scent  being  Roger,  William,  Seth,  Job  and  Charles  Pinckney. 
Physically  the  Sumners  were  large,  broad-shouldered,  deep- 
chested  men,  noted  for  their  fine  personal  appearance  as. well 
as  for  strength,  activity  and  power  of  endurance.  Gener 
ally  they  were  farmers  and  landowners.  Increase  Sumner 
was  a  member  of  the  family.  He  was  honored  by  the  State  of 
Massachusetts  with  a  seat  on  her  Supreme  Bench  and  the  office 
of  Governor.  His  predecessors  in  the  latter  office,  Adams  and 
Hancock,  had  been  crippled  with  age  and  the  gout,  but  as 
Sumner  in  1797  passed  from  the  Old  South  Church,  after  the 
election  sermon,  his  form  caught  the  eye  of  an  old  apple  woman 
who  with  honest  admiration  exclaimed :  "  Thank  God,  we  have 
at  last  got  a  Governor  that  can  walk  " !  Major-General  Edwin 

1 


2  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

V.  Sumner,  who  served  with  distinction  in  the  Mexican  and 
Civil  Wars,  was  the  grandson  of  Seth  Sumner.  The  family  has 
shown  a  taste  for  intellectual  pursuits.  From  1723  a  long  line 
of  them  appears  enrolled  among  the  students  of  Harvard. 

Job,  the  grandfather  of  Charles,  was  there  pursuing  his  stud 
ies  at  the  commencement  of  the  Eevolution  but  the  news  of  Lex 
ington  appealed  so 'strongly  to  the  boy,  that  he  enlisted  in  the 
army,  vvhere  he  continued  until  the  close  of  the  war,  attaining 
the  •  rank  of  Major.  He  served  at  Bunker  Hill,  at  the  siege  of 
'Bostoyi,  on  Lako  Champlain,  at  West  Point  and  New  York.  At 
West  Point  he  commanded  the  guard  over  Major  Andre  a  part 
of  the  time  he  was  under  sentence  of  death.  He  never  re 
turned  to  College,  but  in  consideration  of  his  part  in  the  war, 
he  was,  two  years  after  its  close,  voted  by  the  authorities  of 
the  College  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts,  which  entitled  him  to 
registration  among  the  alumni.  In  1785  he  was  appointed  by 
Congress  a  commissioner  to  adjust  the  accounts  between  the  Con 
federation  and  the  State  of  Georgia,  in  which  capacity  he  served 
until  his  death  in  1789.  He  was  voted  for  as  Governor  of 
Georgia  by  the  Legislature  of  that  State,  but  failed  of  an  elec 
tion  by  a  few  votes.  He  was  stricken  with  a  fever  in  the  South 
and  having  partially  recovered  started  for  home,  but  suffered 
a  relapse  complicated  with  other  disorders  and  died,  on  the  way, 
in  New  York  City,  at  the  age  of  thirty-five.  He  was  buried  in 
St.  Paul's  Churchyard  on  Broadway.  He  was  borne  to  his 
grave  by  eight  officers  of  the  Eevolutionary  War,  attended  by  a 
regiment  of  artillery.  His  funeral  was  attended  by  the  Vice- 
President,  Secretary  of  War  and  the  Senators  and  Kepresenta- 
tives  in  Congress  of  Massachusetts,  New  York  being  then  the 
seat  of  government.  He  was  five  feet,  ten  inches  tall,  stoutly 
built,  quick  in  action,,  a  frank,  generous,  soldierly  man,  fond  of 
society  and  his  friends,  faithful  to  his  trusts,  a  friend  of  edu 
cation  and  a  lover  of  good  books.  He  left  an  estate  in  land 
and  government  securities  valued  at  about  twelve  thousand 
dollars. 

At  the  time  of  his  death  his  son,  Charles  Pinckney  Sumner, 
the  father  of  Charles  Sumner,  was  a  student  at  Phillips  Acad 
emy  at  Andover,  Mass.,  Dr.  Seth  Sumner,  the  brother  of  Major 
Sumner,  became  his  guardian.  Several  letters  from  the  father, 
still  preserved,  show  his  solicitude  for  the  education  and  right 
training  of  the  boy,  from  whom  according  to  the  means  of 
travel  of  that  day  he  was  so  widely  separated.  This  education 
under  the  care  of  his  uncle  went  on  without  interruption  after 
his  father's  death.  Charles  Pinckney  remained  at  Phillips 
Academy  until  1792  when  he  entered  Harvard  College  where 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  3 

he  graduated  in  1796.  He  was  a  classmate  of  John  Pickering, 
the  author  of  Pickering's  Greek  Lexicon — the  same  John  Pick 
ering  who  was  commemorated  by  Charles  Sumner  in  a  bio 
graphical  sketch  published  in  the  Law  Eeporter  of  June,  1846, 
and  in  his  oration  on  "  The  Scholar,  the  Jurist,  the  Artist  and 
the  Philanthropist,"  delivered  at  Harvard  College  in  August 
of  the  same  year.  A  friendship  also  sprang  up  between  Charles 
Pinckney  Sumner  and  Joseph  Story  during  their  college  days, 
though  the  latter  was  two  years  behind  him  in  the  course.  It 
continued  unbroken  until  the  death  of  Mr.  Sumner. 

The  year  after  Charles  Pinckney  Sumner's  graduation  he 
spent  in  teaching  and  the  next  in  a  visit  to  the  West  Indies. 
He  then  commenced  the  study  of  law  and  was  admitted  to  the 
bar  in  1801.  He  commenced  the  practice  of  his  profession  in 
Boston.  Though  well  read  and  an  industrious  man  he  did  not 
succeed.  His  business  was  confined  to  the  collection  of  small 
bills  and  office  work  and  it  was  only  with  the  closest  economy 
that  it  yielded  his  family  a  subsistence.  He  had  no  influential 
antecedents  to  open  a  place  for  him  and  was  perhaps  wanting 
in  that  vigor  and  versatility  of  intellect  which  fits  men  for  the 
more  lucrative  kinds  of  practice. 

His  want  of  success  led  him  to  seek  other  employment.  He 
was  twice  chosen  Clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of 
Massachusetts,  first  for  1806~7  and  again  for  1810-11.  During 
the  last  term  his  friend  Joseph  Story  was  Speaker  of  the  House 
and  resigned  to  become  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States.  He  left  the  bar  in  1819  to  accept  the  place  of 
Deputy  Sheriff  of  Suffolk  County,  which  paid  him  less  than  a 
thousand  dollars  a  year  and  he  retained  this  office  until  1825 
when  Governor  Lincoln  appointed  him  Sheriff.  His  income 
from  this  office  was  from  two  to  three  thousand  dollars  a  year 
and  he  held  it  by  successive  appointments  for  thirteen  years 
and  seven  months  and  until  within  a  few  days  of  his  death. 
He  was  by  this  means  enabled  to  maintain  his  family  in  greater 
comfort  and  at  last  to  leave  an  estate  worth  fifty  thousand 
dollars. 

He  was  the  friend  of  temperance  and  the  public  schools.  He 
was  an  ardent  opponent  of  Masonry  and  having  when  a  young 
man  belonged  to  the  order  and  become  a  master-mason  he  in 
curred  much  ill-will  among  its  members  by  an  exposure  of  the 
secrets  which  he  had  thus  learned.  While  Sheriff  he  witnessed 
the  pro-slavery  riots  of  Boston.  It  was  during  this  time  that 
a  woman's  anti-slavery  meeting  was  entered  and  dispersed  by  a 
mob  of  men,  while  its  president  was  leading  it  in  prayer.  Dur 
ing  the  same  time  William  Lloyd  Garrison  was  seized  and  after 


4  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

his  clothes  had  been  torn  from  his  body  and  his  hat  was  cut 
in  pieces  he  was  dragged  through  the  streets  of  Boston  with  a 
rope  about  his  neck  until  he  was  rescued  by  his  friends  and 
hurried  to  the  Leverett  Street  Jail  to  save  him  from  further 
violence.  Charles  Pinckney  Sumner,  witnessing  such  outrages, 
became  a  strong  anti-slavery  man.  In  his  school  days  he  had 
shown  opposition  to  both  slavery  and  war.  At  a  college  exhibi 
tion  in  1795  he  read  an  original  poem  wherein  he  expressed 
the  wish  that  both  should  cease.  He  retained  his  views  on 
these  subjects  through  life  and  taught  them  to  his  children.  He 
did  not,  however,  unite  with  the  Abolition  movement.  After 
his  appointment  to  the  office  of  Sheriff  in  1825  he  studiously 
held  aloof  from  political  discussions,  considering  them  incom 
patible  with  the  duties  of  his  position.  But  his  known  sym 
pathy  with  the  anti-slavery  movement  caused  some  of  the 
opposition  to  his  last  appointment. 

To  the  duties  of  his  office  he  devoted  himself  with  scrupulous 
exactness.  He  made  a  study  of  the  law  on  the  subject  in  Eng 
land  and  America  and  published  an  article  in  the  Jurist 
pointing  out  some  differences.  At  one  time  when  he  learned 
that  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts  was  about  to  an 
nounce  a  decision,  casting  what  he  considered  an  undue  re 
sponsibility  upon  Sheriffs  in  making  a  levy,  hoping  before  its 
publication  to  change  the  view  of  the  Court  he  addressed  to  the 
Judges  a  voluminous  written  argument  against  it,  but  with 
out  effect.  He  was  the  last  Sheriff  of  Suffolk  County  to  wear 
the  antique  dress,  like  that  worn  by  this  officer  in  England. 
It  is  said  to  have  comported  well  with  his  dignified  bearing. 

He  was  of  medium  height,  erect  and  being  slender  he  ap 
peared  taller  than  he  was  in  reality.  He  was  not  a  handsome 
man,  but  was  neat  in  his  dress  and  in  the  care  of  his  person. 
He  was  scholarly  in  his  tastes  and  an  extensive  reader  of  good 
books.  History  was  his  favorite  pastime  and  he  read  it  care 
fully  with  the  aid  of  maps  and  charts.  He  was  himself  an  oc 
casional  writer  of  both  prose  and  verse.  He  loved  knowledge 
and  enjoyed  cultivated  society.  He  counted  among  his  friends 
many  of  the  best  people  of  Boston.  He  was  a  model  of  courtly 
dignity,  scrupulously  polite,  bowing  low,  touching  his  hand  to 
his  hat  and  waving  it  back  to  his  side.  He  was  rigidly  con 
scientious  and  fearless  in  the  discharge  of  duty.  To  the 
appeals  of  a  culprit  kinsman  who  once  sought  his  kindly  inter 
ference  he  sternly  answered,  "  The  law  must  take  its  course." 
On  another  occasion,  as  Sheriff,  he  read  the  riot  act  to  a  mob, 
amid  a  shower  of  bricks, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER  5 

When  his  opinions  were  once  formed  they  were  seldom 
changed,  regardless  of  what  others  might  wish  he  would  do 
what  he  thought  was  right.  He  was  faithful  in  his  friendships 
and  remembered  a  kindness  with  gratitude.  But  in  his  last 
years  he  became  rigid  and  cheerless,  seldom  smiling  or  entering 
into  the  mirth  of  others  and  little  disposed  to  form  new  as 
sociates  or  to  adopt  new  ways  or  to  be  influenced  by  thoughts 
of  the  convenience  of  others.  As  a  father  he  felt  a  deep  inter 
est  in  the  welfare  of  his  children.  He  had  received  a  good 
education  himself  and  he  wished  to  give  one  to  them.  He  per 
sonally  superintended  their  instruction  and  sought  to  infuse 
them  with  a  love  for  knowledge.  But  his  sombre  disposition 
little  accorded  with  the  cheerful  moods  of  children;  he  was 
exacting  and  required  prompt  obedience  in  tasks  that  he  as 
signed  them,  so  that  while  courting  their  company  his  course 
commanded  respect  for  him  rather  than  love  and  familiarity. 

Charles  Pinckney  Sumner  was  married  in  1810  to  Relief 
Jacobs.  She  was  born  in  1785  and  was  descended  in  the  sev 
enth  generation  from  Nicholas  Jacobs,  a  native  of  England, 
who  settled  in  Massachusetts  in  1633.  On  her  mother's  side 
she  traced  her  lineage  to  William  Hersey  who  came  from  Eng 
land  to  Massachusetts  in  1635.  On  the  same  side  she  was  also 
descended  from  Governor  William  Bradford.  Her  father,  David 
Jacobs,  Jr.,  died  in  1799,  when  she  was  only  fourteen  years 
of  age.  He  was  a  farmer  and  belonged  to  a  family  of  farmers, 
mostly  living  in  Plymouth  county,  Massachusetts.  Relief  Ja 
cobs  was  in  Boston  earning  a  livelihood  by  sewing,  when  she  first 
became  acquainted  with  Charles  Pinckney  Sumner.  They  were 
fellow  boarders  at  the  house  of  Adams  Bailey.  They  were 
married  in  their  own  home,  the  house  in  May  Street  which 
they  had  previously  rented  and  furnished  and  in  which  eight 
of  their  children  were  afterwards  born. 

In  person  Mrs.  Sumner  was  large,  though  not  fleshy.  She 
had  a  fine  constitution  and  throughout  her  long  life  enjoyed  ex 
cellent  health.  She  was  abundantly  educated  in  those  arts 
which  contribute  to  the  comfort  and  happiness  of  a  home.  The 
time  in  which  she  lived  and  the  circumstances  of  her  childhood 
had  in  this  respect  contributed  to  the  natural  bent  of  her 
character.  During  the  first  fifteen  years  of  her  married  life, 
though  her  husband's  income  was  small  and  their  family  large, 
her  prudence  and  economy  enabled  them  to  live  comfortably 
without  becoming  involved  in  debt.  She  never  received  any 
other  education  than  that  of  the  common  school  but  her  native 
good  sense  insured  her  respect  in  any  society.  Her  excellent 
judgment,  appreciative  disposition  and  cheerfulness  of  temper 
always  recommended  her. 


6  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

She  was  a  kind-hearted  motherly  woman  devoted  to  her 
children,  sympathizing  with  their  trials,  but  anxious  to  rear 
them  to  habits  of  integrity  and  usefulness.  She  wished  them  to 
excel  but  taught  them  that  success  was  to  be  expected  from  toil 
and  not  genius  and  that  no  good  thing  would  be  withheld  from 
them  that  walk  uprightly.  She  appreciated  the  responsibilities 
of  life,  was  conscientious  in  the  discharge  of  her  duties,  a  con 
sistent  Christian,  supporting  sorrow  with  calmness  and  success 
with  sobriety.  Her  neighbors  spoke  of  her  as  "an  excellent, 
kind  person";  and  her  pastor  in  her  last  years  paid:  "Mrs. 
Sumner  was  a  woman  of  retiring  simplicity  of  life,  but  of 
strong  and  heroic  traits  of  character  and  those  who  knew  her 
could  trace  in  the  Senator's  noblest  characteristics  a  direct  in 
heritance  from  her." 

The  best  testimonial  of  her  sterling  qualities  is  that  of  her 
husband,  her  daily  companion  for  twenty-nine  years,  who  by  his 
will,  after  only  equalizing  some  small  advancement  to  his  chil 
dren,  gave  her  their  home  for  life  and  all  the  remainder  of  his 
large  estate  absolutely,  confiding  as  he  said,  "in  her  disposi 
tion  to  carry  into  effect  his  wishes  and  in  her  affection  for 
their  children,  and  that  she  will  from  time  to  time  and  finally 
by  her  last  will  make  such  disposition  of  the  property  given 
her  as  justice  and  the  condition  of  the  children  shall  require." 
The  sequel  showed  that  his  confidence  was  not  misplaced  for 
in  her  hands  the  estate  was  doubled  in  value  and  then  went 
to  their  surviving  children  in  equal  shares.  She  survived  her 
husband  twenty-seven  years  and  died  at  the  age  of  eighty-one. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  YOUTH  OF  SUMNER EARLY   SCHOOL  DAYS FATHER  MADE 

SHERIFF 

THE  childhood  and  youth  of  Sumner  were  passed  in  Boston 
and  its  vicinity.  It  was  then  a  much  smaller  place  than  now 
and  its  population  was  more  democratic,  its  citizens  associat 
ing  upon  terms  of  greater  familiarity.  Its  property  was  then 
more  equally  distributed,  instances  of  poverty  and  of  great 
wealth  being  less  common.  Its  people  have  always  been  marked 
for  intelligence.  Then  as  now  the  influence  of  its  excellent 
schools  and  Harvard  College,  its  favorite  seat  of  learning,  in 
the  adjoining  suburb  of  Cambridge  was  noticeable.  The  child 
ish  rambles  of  Sumner  extended  about  both  places.  During  his 
boyhood  he  made  occasional  visits  to  his  mother's  relatives  at 
South  Hingham  and  to  his  father's  at  Dorchester,  one  we  find 
to  Nantasket  Beach.  It  is  not  probable  they  ever  extended 
farther,  until,  in  his  nineteenth  year,  with  some  college  friends, 
he  made  an  excursion  on  foot  to  Lake  Champlain. 

He  was  not  a  playful  child,  nor  was  he  venturesome  or  mis 
chievous,  he  was  rather  of  a  quiet  disposition,  obedient  and 
willing  to  perform  the  tasks  assigned  to  him.  A  childish  in 
cident,  however,  is  related,  which  shows  he  was  then,  as  later 
in  life,  tenacious  of  his  rights.  Some  larger  boys  one  day 
caught  a  stick  with  which  he  was  playing  and  tried  to  wrest  it 
from  him.  But  the  stick  was  his ;  he  would  not  let  it  be  forced 
away.  The  harder  they  pulled  the  more  firmly  he  clung  to  it, 
until  at  last  one  of  the  boys  seizing  a  stone  commenced  to 
pound  his  hands  with  it  to  make  him  let  go,  but  to  no  avail. 
He  would  not  yield.  They  hammered  harder,  but  he  kept  his 
hold,  until  the  blood  finally  appearing  from  the  wounds  on 
his  hands,  they  saw  it  and  ran  away  frightened,  leaving  him  in 
the  possession  of  his  stick. 

The  first  school  he  attended  was  a  private  one  taught  by 
Hannah  R.  Jacobs,  his  mother's  maiden  sister,  in  an  upper 
room  in  his  father's  house.  The  school  was  small  and  furnished 
only  the  most  elementary  instructions.  He  next  entered  the 
West  Writing  School  taught  for  the  public  by  Benjamin  Holt 
in  a  building  at  the  corner  of  Hawkins  and  Chardon  streets. 

7 


8  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Here  he  remained  until  ten  years  of  age,  receiving  instruction 
in  the  ordinary  branches  and  manifesting  no  more  than  ordi 
nary  capacity.  He  was  at  the  same  time  instructed  in  writing 
by  a  special  master.  His  father's  means  being  limited,  it  was 
his  intention  at  this  time  to  give  Charles  only  such  an  educa 
tion  as  would  fit  him  for  a  place  in  some  store,  where  he  could 
support  himself  and  perhaps  render  some  aid  to  the  family. 
He  was  not  therefore  to  be  taught  Greek  and  Latin.  But  a 
circumstance  occurred  which  changed  his  father's  intention. 
Charles  with  a  few  pennies,  which  he  had  earned,  purchased 
some  elementary  Latin  books  from  an  older  boy  and  commenced 
to  study  them.  He  surprised  his  father  one  day  by  presenting 
himself  books  in  hand  before  him  and  requesting  him  to  hear 
his  recitation.  The  father  was  so  touched  by  the  seeming  in 
stinct  of  the  child  that  he  determined  to  allow  him  to  com 
mence  the  study  of  Latin  and  Greek. 

In  August,  1821,  at  ten  years  of  age  he  entered  the  Boston 
Latin  School.  This  institution  has  long  been  held  in  high  es 
teem  by  the  friends  of  substantial  and  accurate  scholarship.  It 
was  established  in  colonial  days  and  many  eminent  men  have 
been  among  its  pupils.  Its  course  of  study  at  this  time  was 
the  one  usually  pursued  in  preparatory  schools,  save  that  it 
was  longer,  comprehending  more  than  was  required  for  ad 
mission  to  Harvard.  Its  principal  instructors  were  Benjamin 
Gould,  its  Master,  and  Ludwick  P.  Leverett,  the  teacher  of 
Latin.  The  latter,  a  very  thorough  teacher,  afterwards  became 
the  author  of  Leverett's  Latin  Lexicon.  It  was  to  his  well- 
directed  efforts  that  Sumner  owed  much  of  his  proficiency  in 
Latin  and  Greek.  He  continued  under  the  instructions  of  these 
teachers  until  1826,  the  prescribed  course  of  study  requiring 
five  years.  There  were  in  the  school  at  this  time,  though  in 
different  classes,  two  boys  with  whom  he  was  afterwards  to  be 
conspicuously  associated, — to  one  as  the  apologist  of  slavery 
and  to  the  other  as  its  determined  opponent.  They  were  Rob 
ert  C.  Winthrop  and  Wendell  Phillips.  Sumner's  standing  in 
his  class,  though  respectable  did  not  indicate  any  remarkable 
talent.  In  1823  he  received  a  prize  for  his  good  conduct.  In 
1824  he  took  a  third  prize  for  Latin  translations  and  in  1826 
he  took  second  prizes  for  a  Latin  poem  and  an  English  theme. 
At  his  graduation  he  received  one  of  the  six  Franklin  medals 
which  were  presented  to  his  class. 

His  superiority  appeared  more  in  conversation  than  in  his 
recitations.  His  taste  for  reading,  which  afterwards  became 
marked,  was  acquired  at  this  time.  He  occupied  many  of  his 
leisure  hours  in  this  way.  He  read  with  interest  books  which 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  9 

are  thought  suitable  for  adults.  And  he  read  them  so  carefully 
as  to  be  able  to  discuss  their  contents  with  persons  older  than 
himself  in  a  way  which  sometimes  excited  the  wonder  of  his 
playmates.  In  1825,  at  the  age  of  fourteen,  he  had  read  enough 
English  History  to  be  able  to  write  with  accuracy  a  compend 
ium  of  it,  eighty  pages  long,  covering  the  whole  period  from 
the  Conquest  by  the  Eomans  to  1801.  The  next  year  he  read 
Gibbon's  History  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
a  copy  of  which  had  been  given  him  as  one  of  his  prizes  at  the 
Latin  School.  He  also  read  a  history  of  Greece. 

One  of  his  playmates  at  the  Latin  School  relates  a  story 
which  illustrates  his  proficiency  in  Geography.  This  was  not 
among  the  requirements  for  admission  to  the  Latin  School  nor 
was  it  in  its  prescribed  course  of  study.  An  ill-natured  teacher 
thought  to  put  him  down  one  day  for  his  ignorance  of  it. 
Sumner  boldly  declared  he  would  answer  any  question  the 
teacher  could  ask  him.  The  teacher  hunted  out  what  he  sup 
posed  to  be  a  very  difficult  question  and  put  it  to  him  and  he 
answered  it  correctly  without  a  moment's  hesitation. 

In  personal  appearance  Sumner  was  at  this  time  tall  and 
slender,  awkward  in  his  movements,  with  a  face  not  handsome. 
His  constitution  owing  to  the  rapidity  of  his  growth  was  not 
strong  and  caused  his  friends  some  anxiety.  He  cared  little  for 
sports  and  seldom  took  part  in  them.  He  was  retiring  in  his 
disposition,  studious  and  found  diversion  chiefly  in  books. 
Without  much  humor  he  was  yet  a  great  talker  and  his  kindly 
disposition  made  him  a  favorite  with  his  playmates.  He  was 
liked  by  his  teachers,  submitted  cheerfully  to  their  discipline, 
obeying  their  rules  and  performing  the  tasks  assigned  him 
promptly.  He  was  correct  in  his  deportment,  had  no  bad 
habits,  did  not  swear  and  discouraged  profanity  in  others.  He 
was  thoughtful,  considerate  and  conscientious. 

On  the  sixth  day  of  September,  1825,  Governor  Levi  Lincoln 
appointed  his  father  Sheriff  oi  Suffolk  County,  Massachusetts. 
This  event  changed  the  father's  circumstances.  He  was  now 
placed  in  a  position  of  comparative  affluence  and  the  rigid 
economy  which  had  thus  far  regulated  his  family  was  no  longer 
imperative.  He  always  remembered  the  appointment  with  grat 
itude  and  ten  years  afterward  characterized  Governor  Lincoln 
as  his  greatest  earthly  benefactor.  The  event  coming  as  it  did 
at  such  an  opportune  time  in  the  life  of  the  son,  just  before 
finishing  his  course  at  the  Latin  School,  and  with  the  certain 
prospect  of  the  continuance  of  good  fortune  for  some  years  to 
come,  changed  the  father's  purpose  as  to  the  career  of  his  son. 
A  month  before,  we  find  him  seeking  admission  for  him  to  a 


10  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

military  school  at  Middletown,  Conn.,  where,  by  his  labor  he 
might  defray  his  own  expenses.  About  this  time  he  asked  the 
Secretary  of  War  to  appoint  him  to  a  cadetship  in  the  Military 
Academy  at  West  Point,  where  his  relative,  Edwin  V.  Simmer, 
had  graduated.  Both  were  probably  suggested  by  his  limited 
means  for  the  views  of  neither  father  nor  son  on  the  subject  of 
war  would  have  induced  them  to  seek  a  military  education  for 
him.  While  the  father  wished  to  give  all  his  nine  children  a 
useful  education,  before  this  appointment  came  to  him  he 
frankly  confessed  his  means  enabled  him  to  think  only  of  use 
fulness. 

To  this  appointment  and  the  incident  of  the  Latin  books, 
Charles  Sumner  owed  his  education  and  to  that  education 
the  achievements  of  his  life.  Without  these  things,  mere  ac 
cidents  as  they  seem,  he  might  have  been  a  clerk  or  a  respectable 
merchant,  but  the  talents  which  gave  him  eminence,  buried 
in  a  counting-room  would  have  been  lost.  It  is  touching  to 
reflect  how  much  in  this  world  depends  on  little  things,  Colum 
bus,  heart-sick,  burdened  with  poverty  and  oppressed  with  dis 
appointments,  abandoning  Spain  in  despair,  when  he  stopped 
at  a  convent  to  beg  for  bread  and,  attracting  the  attention  of 
the  prior,  was  enabled  to  secure  the  interposition  of  the  Queen 
in  fitting  out  an  expedition  to  discover  America;  Shakespeare 
apprehended  in  poaching  upon  his  Lordship's  game-preserve, 
and  Stratford  lost  an  indifferent  wool-comber,  but  the  world 
gained  an  immortal  poet. 


CHAPTER  III 

ENTERS    HARVARD    COLLEGE DISLIKE    FOR    MATHEMATICS — DE 
PORTMENT POPULARITY — FRIENDS EXCURSION     TO     LAKE 

CHAMPLAIN — SOCIETIES — PRIZES  AND  STANDING 

AND  so  it  was  settled  that  Charles  should  go  to  Harvard  Col 
lege.  He  entered  September  first,  1826.  Time  has  wrought 
many  changes  in  the  college  since  then.  Its  undergraduates 
have  more  than  quadrupled  in  number  and  there  has  been  a 
corresponding  increase  in  the  faculty.  Some  of  its  halls  then 
standing  still  remain  but  they  have  been  refitted  and  are  now 
the  least  valuable  part  of  its  property,  its  best  buildings  having 
since  been  erected.  It  now  ranks  as  the  oldest  and  one  of  the 
wealthiest  seats  of  learning  in  the  land.  It  was  then  Harvard 
College ;  it  is  now  Harvard  University.  The  schools  of  theology, 
medicine  and  law,  though  some  steps  had  been  taken  towards 
their  establishment.,  may  be  said  to  be  the  work  of  later  years. 
Many  of  the  names  which  have  given  luster  to  its  faculty  have 
since  been  added, — Story,  Greenleaf,  Parsons,  Quincy,  Everett, 
Felton,  Longfellow,  Holmes,  Agassiz.  They  were  men  of  high 
culture  and  broad  intelligence  and  have  stamped  their  character 
upon  the  institution.  The  course  of  study  is  enlarged  and  its 
requirements  are  more  exacting  but  more  reasonable.  Its  stu 
dents  are  no  longer  required  to  continue  studies  for  which  they 
have  neither  taste  nor  capacity.  Since  the  school  days  of  Sum- 
ner  the  elective  system  has  been  introduced  which  offers  them 
greater  freedom  in  the  choice  of  studies  suited  to  their  purpose, 
without  injury  to  their  class  standing. 

The  old  system  was  ill-suited  to  such  minds  as  his.  Sumner 
had  no  taste  for  mathematics.  His  want  of  capacity  for  such 
studies  created  a  dislike  for  them  and  the  necessity  of  mastering 
them  imposed  by  the  requirements  of  the  course  increased  this 
dislike  to  a  feeling  of  disgust.  During  a  recitation  one  day,  the 
Professor  asked  him  a  question,  when  with  characteristic  candor 
he  replied,  "  I  don't  know.  You  know  I  don't  pretend  to  know 
anything  about  mathematics."  "  Mathematics,  Sumner  !  Math 
ematics  !  "  exclaimed  the  teacher,  •"  Don't  you  know  the  differ 
ence?  This  is  not  mathematics.  This  is  physics."  A  laugh 
from  the  class  followed,  at  Sumner's  expense.  The  farther  he 

11 


12  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

advanced  in  the  mathematical  course,  the  greater  his  difficulties 
became.  At  last,  in  preparing  his  recitations  he  is  said  to  have 
accustomed  himself  to  commit  whole  problems  and  demon 
strations  to  memory,  being  unable  to  follow  the  course  of  reason 
ing.  The  examinations  he  of  course  dreaded.  In  1829  writing 
to  a  classmate,  he  said :  "  Brown  went  home  and  escaped  the 
mathematical  examination.  That  I  attended.  All  I  can  say 
about  myself  is,  gratia  Deo,  I  escaped  with  life." 

This  deficiency  of  Sumner  affected  his  position  in  his  class. 
A  high  standing  in  our  American  colleges  depends  more  upon 
making  a  fair  recitation  every  time  in  every  study,  than  upon 
making  a  brilliant  recitation  sometimes  in  some  study.  When 
Sumner  entered  college  he  had  hopes  of  reaching  distinction  in 
his  class  and  he  strove  to  do  so,  but  this  deficiency  in  mathe 
matics  soon  blasted  these  hopes  and  thenceforward  he  studied 
such  textbooks  as  he  liked  and  neglected  others. 

But  notwithstanding  his  carelessness  of  class  standing  he  was, 
as  a  student,  industrious  and  obedient  to  the  rules  of  the  college. 
He  allowed  himself  little  time  for  rest  and  recreation  and  was 
usually  to  be  found  in  his  room  at  work.  There  were  of  course 
some  playful  exceptions.  Once  during  his  Freshman  year,  with 
his  classmate  Bemis,  he  left  the  college,  without  permission,  to 
go  to  the  Brighton  cattle  show.  Upon  arriving  at  the  fair, 
among  the  first  persons  the  boys  met  were  their  fathers,  who 
had  likewise  been  classmates  at  college.  Upon  being  asked  by 
their  fathers  how  they  came  there  and  why  they  had  broken  the 
college  rules  by  leaving  without  permission,  they  apologized  for 
their  conduct  by  saying  that  they  wished  to  come  to  the  fair  and 
thought  there  could  be  no  harm  in  doing  so  as  they  would  miss 
no  recitation  by  their  absence.  The  fathers  made  no  farther 
objection  but  advised  them  to  return  at  once.  Mr.  Sumner, 
however,  taking  young  Bemis  aside  asked  him  how  Charles 
stood  in  mathematics.  "Very  well,  indeed,  sir,"  said  he,  with 
unquestionable  fidelity  to  his  classmate.  "  I  am  glad  to  hear 
it,"  said  Mr.  Sumner.  "  He  is  doing  better  than  I  did.  I  let 
drop  the  links  and  lost  the  chain  and  have  never  been  able  to 
take  it  up  again." 

We  find  also  one  other  breach  of  the  college  rules,  more  a 
joke,  however,  than  a  defiance  of  authority.  The  rules  pre 
scribed  the  dress  of  an  undergraduate  and  among  other  things, 
if  a  summer  vest  was  worn  it  was  to  be  white.  Sumner  wore  a 
buff-colored  one.  He  was  warned  by  the  college  authorities  that 
he  was  violating  the  rule.  He  replied  that  his  vest  was  white  or 
near  enough  so  to  comply  with  the  regulation,  and  continued 
to  wear  it.  The  admonition  was  repeated  again  and  again  but 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  13 

Charles  maintained  that  his  was  a  substantial  compliance  with 
the  rule.  At  last  the  authorities  gave  it  up,  not,  however,  until 
they  had  vindicated  their  offended  authority  by  adding  a  small 
fine  to  his  term  bill  by  way  of  punishment. 

Sumner  was  a  favorite  with  his  classmates.  At  this  early 
age  he  showed  that  polite  consideration  for  the  feelings  of  others 
which  became  characteristic  of  him  in  maturer  years.  He  was 
upright  and  honorable  in  his  conduct  and  was  disposed  to  put 
the  same  construction  upon  the  motives  of  others.  There  was 
nothing  morbid  in  his  disposition;  he  enjoyed  a  well-timed 
joke,  would  willingly  play  a  game  of  chess  or  cards  and  was 
always  ready  to  do  a  kindness  for  a  friend.  It  would  be  hard 
to  find  one  more  devoted  to  his  friends  than  he  was.  As  he  had 
always  lived  in  Boston  and  had  been  five  years  in  the  Latin 
school,  his  circle  of  acquaintances  in  college  was  larger  than 
that  of  most  of  his  classmates.  He  did  not  confine  his  friend 
ship  to  one  class.  With  little  distinction  he  mingled  with  the 
members  of  every  class  both  in  their  rooms  and  in  their  recre 
ations.  For  what  is  known  as  society  he  cared  nothing  and 
though  his  connections  in  Boston  and  Cambridge  afforded  him 
opportunities  for  entering  it,  unlike  most  boys  he  does  not  seem 
to  have  cared  to  improve  them.  He  preferred  to  be  with  those 
who  had  aspirations  and  sympathies  like  his  own. 

His  most  intimate  college  friends  were  John  W.  Brown, 
Jonathan  F.  Stearns,  Charlemagne  Tower,  Thomas  Hopkinson, 
John  B.  Kerr  and  Barzillai  Frost.  The  first  two  were  his 
chums,  Stearns  in  his  freshman  and  Brown  in  sophomore  and 
senior  years.  The  former  afterwards  entered  the  ministry,  the 
latter  studied  law.  Of  them  all,  he  was  most  intimate  with 
Brown.  His  buoyant  spirits,  his  energy  amounting  almost  to 
violence,  his  independence  of  thought  and  action,  his  wayward 
disposition,  delighting  in  the  works  and  the  character  of  Byron, 
had  a  peculiar  fascination  for  Sumner.  They  remained  friends 
through  life,  corresponding  after  graduation,  together  again  at 
the  Law  school,  members  of  the  same  bar,  Sumner  after  Brown's 
death  in  1860  writing  a  sympathetic  tribute  to  his  memory. 

In  his  junior  year  together  with  three  classmates  he  made  an 
excursion  on  foot  to  Lake  Champlain.  This  is  the  first  evidence 
of  that  love  of  travel  which  afterwards  developed  itself.  It 
seems  like  the  first  promptings  of  a  restless  energy  characteristic 
of  the  family. 

The  boys  started  on  the  fourteenth  of  July,  1829,  going  first 
to  Amherst  where  they  arrived,  weary  and  foot-sore  on  the 
evening  of  the  third  day  and  immediately  refreshed  themselves 
with  the  prayer  in  the  college  chapel.  Afterwards  they  viewed 


14  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  college  buildings  and  enjoyed  the  fine  prospect  of  the  sur 
rounding  country  from  the  chapel  tower.  The  next  morning 
they  started  to  ascend  Mt.  Holyoke  and  having  lost  their 
way,  in  the  by-paths  of  the  mountain,  they  turned  their  faces 
directly  towards  the  summit,,  pushing  through  brambles,  clam 
bering  over  rocks,  crawling  around  precipices,  often  in  danger 
of  their  lives  until  they  reached  the  top  at  last.  Their  efforts 
were  rewarded  by  the  magnificent  prospect  which  lay  before 
them,  "  with  river  of  silver,  winding  through  meadows  of  gold/' 
From  Mt.  Holyoke  they  went  to  Deerfield  and  Bloody-Brook, 
scenes  of  Indian  warfare  and  massacre,  thence  to  Bennington, 
passing  the  night  on  the  battlefield  of  the  Revolution  where 
the  cause  of  the  colonists  began  to  brighten.  Pursuing  their 
way,  they  reached  Ticonderoga  at  last,  having  travelled  two 
hundred  and  three  miles  in  nine  days.  On  their  return  they 
passed  through  Saratoga  to  Albany,  pausing  at  the  former 
place  to  view  the  scenes  of  Burgoyne's  defeat  and  surrender.  At 
Albany,  Sumner  parted  company  with  Babcock,  the  last  of  his 
companions,  the  others,  Frost  and  Munroe,  unable  to  keep  up, 
having  long  before  been  left  behind.  From  Albany  Sumner 
pursued  his  journey  alone  to  New  York,  travelling  by  boat  and 
stopping  on  the  way  a  few  hours  at  both  Catskill  and  West 
Point. 

This  was  his  first  view  of  the  Hudson,  then  as  now  famed  as 
one  of  the  most  beautiful  rivers  of  the  world.  He  found  it 
even  thus  early  carrying  on  its  broad,  still  flowing  waters, 
crowds  of  tourists,  among  hills  and  valleys  and  mountains  of 
surpassing  loveliness.  Its  shores  are  dotted  with  scenes  of  his 
toric  interest  recalling  the  struggles  of  the  settlers  with  the 
Indians  and  later  with  the  British.  The  whole  region  is  en 
veloped  in  a  halo  of  legend  and  song  such  as  gathers  around 
no  other  part  of  our  country. 

Sumner  kept  a  journal  of  his  trip  in  which  he  records  the 
events  and  impressions  of  each  day.  It  is  fullest  when  dwell 
ing  upon  these  scenes  made  memorable  by  the  struggles  of  the 
colonists  with  enemies  who  were  loath  to  give  up  such  a  fair 
possession.  Extracts  from  this  journal  were  afterward  pub 
lished  in  a  Boston  paper,  the  first  of  his  writings  to  appear 
in  print  save  an  essay  on  the  English  Universities,  which  ante 
dated  the  other  by  a  few  months. 

This  essay  was  read  to  "  The  Nine,"  a  college  society  which 
he  together  with  eight  of  his  classmates  organized  in  their 
senior  year.  It  was  a  secret  association  for  mutual  improve 
ment,  receiving  its  name  from  the  number  of  its  members  and 
meeting  weekly  in  one  of  their  rooms.  In  his  Junior  year 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  15 

Sumner  became  a  member  of  another  society,  "  The  Hasty  Pud 
ding  Club." 

In  his  Senior  year  he  contended  for  the  Bowdoin  prize, 
given  for  excellence  in  English  composition.  The  subject  as 
signed  was,  "  The  present  Character  of  the  Inhabitants  of  New 
England  as  resulting  from  the  Civil,  Literary  and  Religious 
Institutions  of  the  First  Settlers."  His  essay  was  signed,  "  A 
Son  of  New  England."  He  received  the  second  prize,  thirty 
dollars,  and  invested  it  in  books.  Among  them  was  a  copy 
of  Shakespeare's  Works  which  he  kept  afterwards  upon  his 
table,  ready  for  use.  On  the  day  of  his  death  it  was  found 
there  open  with  his  mark  between  the  pages,  where  he  had  just 
noted  with  his  pencil  the  passage  in  "  Henry,  the  Seventh." 

"  Would  I  were  dead,  if  God's  good  will  were  so, 
For  what  is  in  this  world  but  grief  and  woe." 

At  the  Junior  Exhibition  of  his  class,  he  performed  the  part 
of  the  "  orator  "  in  a  Greek  dialogue.  At  the  Senior  Exhibition 
and  also  at  commencement,  he  had  parts  in  conferences,  his 
being  respectively,  "  Bonaparte  as  a  statesman  and  soldier," 
and  "  The  Eeligious  Notions  of  the  North  American  Indians." 
He  seems  to  have  been  dissatisfied  with  the  places  assigned  him 
on  these  occasions  and  wished  to  decline  them  and  would  prob 
ably  have  done  so  but  for  the  earnest  protest  of  his  father. 
Though  the  places  were  not  such  as  his  classmates  thought  he 
deserved,  they  were  probably  all  his  standing  warranted. 

In  his  class  Sumner  excelled  in  the  humanities  and  in  dec 
lamation  and  composition.  His  performances  of  that  time 
resembled  his  later  works,  though  marked  with  less  strength 
and  accuracy  in  the  use  of  words.  In  public  speaking  he  had 
the  same  earnest  yet  subdued  manner  which  afterward  seemed 
to  impress  his  audiences  with  the  thought  that  he  had  a  greater 
power  in  reserve  than  he  cared  to  wield.  In  proficiency  in  the 
languages  he  had  few  equals  among  his  classmates.  He  was 
well  instructed  in  the  rudiments  of  these  studies  in  the  Latin 
School  and  the  high  rank  he  took  in  them  at  his  entrance  to 
college,  he  maintained  through  the  course.  He  entered  so  much 
into  the  spirit  of  them  that  many  passages  of  the  books  he  read 
were  impressed  upon  his  memory  and  were  ready  for  use  when 
a  happy  opportunity  for  quotation  occurred.  The  fluency  and 
diction  of  his  translations  impressed  his  classmates.  He  en 
joyed  these  studies  but  his  proficiency  in  them  was  the  result 
of  careful  study. 

His  diligence,  in  such  studies  as  he  enjoyed,  is  illustrated  by 
something  which  occurred  in  his  sophomore  year.  In  the 


16  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

months  of  February  and  March,  he  attended  lectures  delivered 
by  Professor  Ticknor  on  French  Literature.  Sumner  took  such 
an  interest  in  them  that  at  the  close  of  each  lecture  he  wrote  out 
so  much  of  it  as  he  could  remember  and  then  at  the  end  added 
an  index  to  the  whole  course.  His  notes  were  so  voluminous 
as  to  occupy  one  hundred  and  fifty  pages  of  his  notebook. 
Such  industry  produced  its  natural  result  and  had  it  not  been 
for  his  failure  in  mathematics  it  is  fair  to  conclude  that  he 
would  have  been  among  the  first  scholars  of  his  class.  It  is  im 
possible  now  to  tell  what  his  class  standing  really  was,  the 
scales  by  which  it  is  determined  having  been  lost  or  destroyed. 
His  class  contained  forty-eight  members  and  he  probably  stood 
between  the  twentieth  and  twenty-fifth. 

Because  he  did  not  take  a  higher  position,  he  has  been  pointed 
to  as  an  illustration  of  the  error,  as  pernicious  as  it  is  erroneous, 
that  boys  of  high  standing  are  never  heard  of  after  they  leave 
college.  The  records  of  every  college  disprove  this.  The  re 
sult  attained  by  a  careful  examination  of  the  records  of  five 
of  the  most  celebrated  of  our  American  colleges  is  that  "the 
conclusion  is  irresistible  that  the  vast  majority  of  the  scholars, 
the  writers,  the  clergymen,  the  lawyers  and  the  statesmen  who 
have  gained  distinction  by  the  work  of  their  life  have  first  won 
distinction  in  the  college  recitation  and  lecture  room.  A  like 
conclusion  was  reached  by  Macaulay  after  an  examination  of 
the  records  of  the  English  Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cam 
bridge.  "  It  seems  to  me,"  he  says,  "  that  there  never  was  a 
fact  proved  by  a  larger  mass  of  evidence  or  a  more  unvaried 
experience  than  this,  that  men  who  distinguished  themselves 
in  their  youth  above  their  contemporaries  almost  always  keep 
to  the  end  of  their  lives  the  start  which  they  have  gained — the 
general  rule  is  beyond  all  doubt  that  the  men  who  were  first  in 
the  competition  of  the  schools  have  been  first  in  the  competi 
tion  of  the  world."  The  college  life  of  Sumner  proves  the  same 
fact.  He  displayed  in  college  the  same  moral  qualities,  the 
same  proficiency  in  writing  and  speaking,  the  same  love  of  liter 
ature  as  he  afterwards  displayed  in  the  Senate.  The  same  traits 
of  character  which  gave  him  eminence  among  his  classmates 
gave  him  eminence  among  men  and  in  public  life. 

He  was  never  extravagant.  When  years  afterwards  in  the 
Senate  he  was  asked  by  a  friend,  why  he  did  not  adopt  a  more 
luxurious  manner  of  life,  he  replied,  "  the  nation  cannot  afford 
to  give  me  more  than  six  thousand  dollars  a  year  and  I  cannot 
afford  to  spend  more  than  she  gives."  He  was  not  extravagant 
in  college.  His  four  annual  term  bills  average  less  than  two 
hundred  dollars  each.  He  was  always  of  steady  purpose. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  17 

Though  unexpected  obstacles  might  make  the  attainment  of 
his  object  more  difficult,  whatever  he  undertook  he  would  spare 
no  effort  to  do.  His  love  of  reading  which  appeared  so  strong 
in  the  Latin  School,  became  stronger  during  his  college  course. 
He  spent  much  of  his  time  in  this  way,  reading  widely  and 
well,  his  memory,  always  remarkable,  enabling  him,  with  little 
effort,  to  retain  whatever  he  wished.  His  favorite  author  was 
Shakespeare,  from  whose  writings  he  was  continually  quoting 
from  memory.  In  his  senior  year  he  commenced  to  keep  a  com 
mon-place  book,  copying  into  it  extracts  chiefly  from  the  old 
English  authors  and  from  the  current  literature  of  the  day.  He 
continued  to  keep  this  book;  and  many  of  the  quotations  in  his 
public  efforts  of  a  later  day  are  taken  from  this  source.  The 
extent  of  his  reading  was  remarked  by  his  classmates  and  not 
without  reason,  for  at  his  graduation  he  had,  perhaps,  a  larger 
acquaintance  with  books  than  any  member  of  his  class. 


CHAPTER   IV 

UNDECIDED  AS  TO  PROFESSION — PRIZE  FOR  ESSAY  ON  COMMERCE 

— WORK  OF  YEAR  AFTER  GRADUATION ENTERS  LAW  SCHOOL 

—INDUSTRY FRIENDSHIP  OF  PROFESSORS  STORY  AND  ASH- 

MUN — ADMITTED     TO      BAR VISITS      WASHINGTON — CHAR 
ACTER 

SUMNER  graduated  at  Harvard  College  August  twenty-fifth, 
1830.  His  attachments  to  the  place  and  to  his  classmates  were 
strong  and  he  believed  his  regret  at  the  separation  was  greater 
than  that  of  most  of  the  members  of  his  class.  This  feeling  of 
regret  was  increased  by  the  uncertainty  of  his  future  course. 
His  friends  had  chosen  their  professions  but  he  had  not. 
Brown,  Tower  and  Hopkinson,  those  with  whom  he  was  most 
intimate,  had  chosen  the  law  and  this  was  his  preference,  but 
the  fear  of  natural  unfitness  and  of  failure,  caused  him  many 
misgivings  and  left  him,  at  last,  undecided.  He  mistrusted  his 
ability  to  reach  the  position  he  desired  in  the  profession.  In 
these  difficulties  his  father  gave  him  no  assistance,  but  seemed 
determined  to  leave  him  to  the  freedom  of  his  own  choice.  He 
expressed  no  wish  and  gave  him  no  advice,  doubtless  having  in 
mind  his  own  career  and  thinking  that  the  question  was  one 
of  immediate  concern  to  Charles  alone  and  that  if  left  entirely 
to  himself  he  would  be  more  laborious  in  the  pursuit  of  the 
profession  he  chose.  But  this  silence  troubled  Charles  who  per 
haps  misconstrued  it.  One  of  his  reasons  for  hesitating  to 
choose  any  profession,  was  a  desire,  almost  morbid,  to  save  his 
father  any  farther  expense  on  his  account.  For  this  reason  he 
sought,  though  unsuccessfully,  the  position  of  usher  in  the 
Boston  Latin  School. 

The  first  year  after  his  graduation  was  spent  at  home  pur 
suing  a  course  of  private  study.  We  find  him  taking  a  sterner 
view  of  life.  With  real  candor,  he  wrote  to  his  classmate: 
"  Tower,  you  and  I  are  both  young  and  the  world  is  all  before 
us.  You  are  ambitious  I  know,  and  I  am  not  ashamed  to  con 
fess,  though  '  by  that  sin  fell  the  angels/  that  I  also  am  guilty. 
We  are  then  fellow  laborers  in  the  same  field,  we  are  both  strik 
ing  our  sickles  at  the  same  harvest.  Its  golden  sheaves  are  all 
pointing  to  you.  You  have  been  laborious  and  I  have  not.  I 

18 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  19 

have  trod  the  primrose  and  you  the  thorny  path. — There  is  no 
railway  to  fame.  Labor,  labor  must  be  before  our  eyes,  nay 
more,  its  necessity  must  sink  deep  in  our  hearts.  This  is  the 
most  potent  alchemy  to  transmute  lead  to  gold." 

During  this  winter  the  Boston  Society  for  the  Diffusion  of 
Useful  Knowledge  offered  a  prize  to  the  minor  who  would  pro 
duce  the  best  essay  on  a  subject  relating  to  trade,  commerce  or 
manufactures.  The  essay  was  to  be  presented  to  the  committee 
by  January  first,  1831.  A  short  time  before  the  day  specified 
Sumner  determined  to  contest  for  it  and  accordingly  prepared 
and  presented  an  essay  on  Commerce.  On  the  first  day  of 
April  following  he  was  declared  the  successful  competitor.  The 
decision  was  announced  by  the  President  of  the  Society,  Daniel 
Webster,  at  the  close  of  a  lecture,  on  the  evening  of  that  day. 
Sumner  was  asked  to  come  forward  and  receive  the  prize,  Lie- 
ber's  Encyclopedia  Americana,  valued  at  thirty  dollars.  He  did 
so  and  was  taken  by  the  hand  by  Mr.  Webster  and  kindly  com 
plimented  and  assured  that  his  country  had  a  pledge  of  him. 

As  has  already  been  remarked,  Sumner  revealed  in  college  a 
talent  for  composition  and  declamation  and  in  such  work 
ranked  among  the  best  in  his  class.  He  was  now  showing  a  de 
cided  interest  in  these  subjects  and  his  letters  of  the  time  con 
tain  frequent  allusions  to  the  oratorical  displays  he  witnessed 
and  to  the  triumphs  of  the  orators.  It  was  the  gradual  awak 
ening  of  the  latent  spirit  of  the  coming  man.  He  was  espe 
cially  attracted  to  the  great  orator  of  the  Boston  of  that  day, 
"  the  huge  leviathan  of  New  England,"  as  he  called  him,  Daniel 
Webster.  More  than  four  years  before,  Mr.  Webster  delivered 
in  Faneuil  Hall  his  eulogy  on  Adams  and  Jefferson.  Sumner, 
then  a  mere  boy  in  the  Latin  School,  wedged  his  way  into  the 
throng,  just  in  time  to  hear  the  supposed  speech  of  John 
Adams,  considered  by  those  who  heard  it,  the  finest  passage 
of-  the  oration.  It  left  an  enduring  impression  on  the  boy. 
In  the  October  previous  to  taking  the  prize  for  his  essay  on 
Commerce,  he  had  gone  on  two  successive  evenings  to  Faneuil 
Hall  to  hear  Mr.  Webster  discuss  the  tariff  question  and  about 
the  same  time  he  went  to  Salem  to  hear  his  argument  in  the 
trial  of  Joseph  J.  Knapp  for  the  murder  of  Stephen  White. 

These,  however,  were  diversions.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
year,  fearful  that  he  might  be  tempted  to  waste  his  time,  Sum 
ner  prescribed  a  course  of  study  for  himself.  He  thus  de 
scribed  it  to  a  classmate,  "  a  course  of  mathematics,  Juvenal, 
Tacitus,  a  course  of  modern  history,  Hallam's  Middle  Ages, 
Roscoe's  "  Leo  "  and  "  Lorenzi  "  and  Robertson's  "  Charles 
Fifth/'  with  indefinite  quantities  of  Shakespeare,  Burton,  Brit- 


20  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ish  Poets,  etc.,  and  writing  an  indefinite  number  of  long  letters. 
I  have  doomed  myself  to  hard  labor  and  I  shall  try  to  look  upon 
labor  as  some  great  lawyer  did,  as  pleasure — '  Labor  ipse  volup- 
tas ',"  Sumner  showed  that  he  was  not  afraid  of  labor,  by  vol 
untarily  undertaking  the  study  of  mathematics.  Though  so  lit 
tle  to  his  taste,  he  studied  them  faithfully,  during  part  of  the 
year  devoting  four  hours  each  day  to  geometry  alone.  With 
such  application  he  succeeded,  but  he  still  found  them  a  dis 
agreeable  study.  "  I  am  now  digging  among  the  roots  of  Alge 
bra/'  he  wrote  to  a  friend,  "  and  believe  your  opinion  will  bear 
me  out,  when  I  say  that  these  roots  when  obtained  are  but 
bitter." 

He,  however,  completed  the  course  he  prescribed.  He  read 
besides,  in  Latin,  Persius ;  and  in  English,  a  number  of  books, 
among  which  was  the  "  Correspondence  of  Gilbert  Wakefield 
with  Charles  James  Fox,  chiefly  on  subjects  of  Classical  Liter 
ature."  But  at  the  close  of  the  year  he  looked  back  with  dis 
satisfaction.  "  The  latter  part  of  this  year,"  he  wrote,  "  has 
been  given  up  to  unprofitableness.  I  have  indeed  studied  or 
passed  my  eyes  over  books,  but  much  of  my  time  and  almost  my 
whole  mind  have  been  occupied  with  newspapers  and  politics." 
Freemasonry  was  then  agitating  the  public  and  this  subject, 
which  he  was  attracted  to  by  his  father's  interest  in  it,  he  gave 
too  much  time. 

But  the  commencement  of  another  year  brought  a  change. 
He  determined  to  study  law  and  on  the  first  of  September,  1831, 
he  entered  the  Law  School  of  Harvard  College.  Newspapers 
and  politics  were  dismissed.  The  latter  he  so  much  forgot  as 
shortly  afterwards  to  congratulate  a  Professor  upon  his  election 
to  the  State  Senate,  not  knowing  that  he  had  just  been  defeated. 
His  choice  of  the  profession  of  law  was  made  after  much  hesi 
tation  and  without  enthusiasm,  but  his  ideal  was  high  and  he 
determined  to  be  satisfied  with  no  inferior  position. 

He  wrote  to  his  classmate  Stearns :  "  I  had  rather  be  a  toad 
and  live  upon  dungeon's  vapor  than  one  of  those  lumps  of  flesh 
that  are  christened  lawyers  and  who  know  only  how  to  wring 
from  quibbles  and  obscurities  that  justice  which  else  they  never 
would  reach,  who  have  no  idea  of  the  law  beyond  its  letter,  nor 
of  literature  beyond  their  term  Reports  and  statutes.  If  I  am 
a  lawyer  I  wish  to  be  one,  who  can  dwell  upon  the  vast  heap  of 
law  matter  as  the  temple  in  which  the  majesty  of  right  has 
taken  its  abode,  who  will  aim  beyond  the  mere  letter  at  the 
spirit,  the  broad  spirit  of  the  law  and  who  will  bring  to  his  aid 
a  liberal  and  cultivated  mind.  Is  not  this  an  honest  ambition  ? 
If  not,  reprove  me  for  it.  A  lawyer  is  one  of  the  best  or  worst 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  21 

of  men,  according  as  he  shapes  his  course.  He  may  breed 
strifes  or  he  may  settle  the  dissensions  of  years.  But  when  1 
look  before  me  and  above  me  and  see  the  impendent  weight, — 
molem  ingentem  et  perpetuis  humeris  sustinendam, — I  incon 
tinently  shrink  back.  Book  peers  above  book  and  one  labor  of 
investigation  is  gone  through  with  only  to  show  a  greater  one, — 
'  what  man  has  done,  man  can  do 9  and  in  these  words  is  a  full 
fountain  of  hope.  And  here  again  Burke,  '  There  is  nothing  in 
the  world  really  beneficial  that  does  not  lie  within  the  reach  of 
an  informed  understanding  and  a  well-directed  pursuit.  There 
is  nothing  that  God  has  judged  for  us  that  he  has  not  given  us 
the  means  to  accomplish,  both  in  the  natural  and  moral  world.' 
What  a  sentiment,  how  rich  in  expression,  how  rich  in  truth. 
But  such  results  cannot  be  accomplished  without  labor,  sys 
tematic  and  well  directed.  I  am  determined  that  if  health  is 
continued  to  me,  lack  of  study  shall  not  be  laid  to  my  charge. 
Study  is  my  talisman." 

Sumner  divided  his  time,  forenoon  to  law,  afternoon  to 
classics  and  evenings  to  history  and  subjects  auxiliary  to  law. 
Two  o'clock  in  the  morning  was  his  usual  hour  for  retiring  to 
rest.  He  roomed  at  number  ten,  Divinity  Hall,  and  later  in 
Dane  Hall,  retired  parts  of  the  college,  working  hard,  allowing 
himself  little  time  for  rest  and  recreation,  having  few  associates, 
taking  little  exercise,  seldom  'out  of  his  room  at  nights.  This 
severe  application  troubled  his  friends,  who  feared  that  his  con 
stitution  could  not  sustain  such  drafts  as  he  made  upon  it,  a 
tendency  to  consumption  being  hereditary  in  his  family. 

Though  his  course  of  reading  while  in  the  Law  School  was 
large,  he  gave  especial  attention  to  the  prescribed  studies,  read 
ing  carefully  the  notes  and  many  of  the  cases  referred  to  in 
his  textbooks.  He  continued  his  habit  of  common-placing  and 
copied  into  his  note-book  the  definitions  given  in  some  parts  of 
Blackstone's  Commentaries.  His  teachers  were  impressed  with 
his  remarkable  memory  and  the  facility  with  which  he  recalled 
the  results  of  his  reading. 

In  1832  he  was  appointed  librarian  of  the  Law  School  and  in 
this  capacity  he  soon  became  so  familiar  with  the  library  as  to 
be  able  to  find  any  book  on  its  shelves,  in  the  dark.  The  text 
books  in  it  he  familiarized  himself  with,  so  that  he  could  give  a 
summary  of  the  contents  of  almost  every  one  of  them,  together 
with  a  brief  biographical  sketch  of  the  author.  It  was  owing 
to  these  circumstances  that  even  thus  early,  his  assistance  was 
occasionally  sought  by  practising  attorneys  in  the  preparation 
of  their  briefs.  He  continued  librarian  during  the  remainder 
of  his  course  at  the  Law  School.  The  last  year  he  prepared  a 


22  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

catalogue  of  the  library  with  a  brief  sketch  of  its  origin  and 
growth,  for  which  he  was  paid  by  the  corporation. 

In  1832,  Sumner  competed  successfully  for  another  Bowdoin 
prize.  From  a  number  of  subjects  proposed,  he  chose  this: 
"  Are  the  most  Important  Changes  of  Society  effected  Gradually 
or  by  Violent  Eevolutions  "  ?  He  chose  this  subject  because 
his  previous  historical  reading  would  enable  him  to  discuss  it 
intelligently  without  special  preparation  or  interruption  to  his 
prescribed  studies.  His  performance,  more  than  fifty  pages  in 
length,  was  commenced  about  a  fortnight  previous  to  the  day 
specified  for  its  presentation  and  was  written  in  the  intervals  of 
time  at  his  command.  It  bears  the  marks  of  haste  and  is  not 
superior  to  the  performances  of  young  men  of  his  age.  He 
argued  that  the  most  important  changes  of  society  are  effected 
gradually  and  that  such  revolutions  are  to  be  encouraged,  but 
that  violent  ones  are  not. 

He  was  also  during  the  last  year  of  his  connection  with  the 
Law  School  an  occasional  contributor  to  periodicals.  An 
article  in  the  American  Monthly  Review  on  "  Impeachments  " 
and  another  in  the  American  Jurist,  a  review  of  a  lecture  by 
Professor  Parke  on  Courts  of  Equity  were  favorably  spoken  of 
at  the  time.  The  latter  is  referred  to  by  Judge  Story  in  a 
note  to  his  "  Equity  Jurisprudence  ",  with  the  remark  that  he 
"  knew  not  where  to  refer  the  reader  to  pages  more  full  of 
useful  comment  and  research  ". 

Sumner  was  at  this  time  the  president  of  a  temperance 
society  established  among  the  students.  It  seems  to  have  been 
a  trait  of  his  character  to  be  strongly  attracted  by  any  move 
ment  which  could  surround  itself  with  the  charm  of  novelty. 
Previous  to  this  he  had  warmly  supported  the  anti-masonic 
movement ;  later  in  life  we  find  him  equally  earnest  in  the  cause 
of  universal  peace,  universal  freedom  and  universal  suffrage. 
Age  had  no  charm  for  him.  For  one  situated  as  he  was  destined 
to  be  it  was  perhaps  well;  but  for  men  in  ordinary  times  it 
should  have  more. 

Sumner's  application  while  a  student  at  the  Law  School  soon 
attracted  the  attention  of  his  professors,  Joseph  Story  and  John 
H.  Ashmun.  The  former,  the  author  of  works  on  commercial 
and  constitutional  law,  was  also  one  of  the  Justices  of  the  Su 
preme  Court  of  the  United  States.  He  and  Sumner's  father 
while  students  together  at  Harvard  had  been  friends.  This 
friendship,  never  interrupted,  first  brought  Charles  to  Story's 
attention.  There  has  seldom  been  a  more  beautiful  relation  be 
tween  teacher  and  pupil  than  that  which  thus  commenced.  It 
was  interrupted  only  by  death.  The  simplicity  and  purity  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  23 

Sumner's  character,  his  appreciative  disposition,  his  enthusi 
asm,  his  love  for  knowledge,  the  extent  of  his  reading  and  his 
capacity  to  retain  what  he  read,  his  ambition  in  his  chosen  pro 
fession,  the  earnest  effort  he  made  to  realize  it,  all  appealed  to 
Story's  love  for  young  men.  He  came  to  regard  Sumner  al 
most  as  a  son.  He  directed  his  studies,  advised  his  reading, 
welcomed  him  to  his  home,  his  fireside  and  his  confidence. 

If  Story  sent  books  from  Washington  for  distribution,  it 
was  Sumner's  hand  which  delivered  them.  If  Story's  place  at 
the  Law  School  was  vacant  it  soon  became  Sumner's  duty  to 
fill  it.  If  Story's  son  wanted  a  playfellow,  it  was  Sumner  who 
was  always  willing  to  interest  or  instruct  him.  After  Sumner 
was  in  his  grave  and  this  boy,  man-grown,  was  left  to  record  the 
friendship,  it  is  touching  to  read  his  recollection  of  it,  which 
seems  so  tenderly  to  draw  aside  the  veil  from  this  scene  of 
happy  boyhood,  hallowed  by  the  touch  of  death.  Everything 
about  it  seems  sacred,  the  books  they  exchanged,  the  passages 
they  read,  the  stories  they  told,  their  amusements,  all  are 
tinged  with  that  tenderness  which  only  the  grave  can  add, 
mingled  with  thoughts  of  childhood  and  innocence  and  friend 
ship  and  fidelity.  As  Sumner  over  the  grave  of  Story,  the 
father,  wrote  his  "  Tribute  of  Friendship  ",  so  Story,  the  son, 
over  the  grave  of  Sumner  added  his  "  In  Memoriam  ".  The 
influence  of  Story  on  Sumner's  character  was  handed  on  by 
Sumner  to  Story's  son.  It  is  difficult  to  measure  this  influence. 
Sumner's  respect  and  admiration  for  Story  now  were  almost 
boundless.  For  many  years  he  was  his  ideal  and  a  better  ideal 
for  an  ambitious  young  man  it  would  be  difficult  to  find. 

Joseph  Story  was  born  at  Marblehead,  Mass.,  in  1779, 
graduated  from  Harvard  College  in  1798,  was  admitted  to  the 
bar  and  rapidly  rose  to  eminence  in  his  profession.  In  1809  he 
entered  Congress,  but  declined  a  re-election  and  was  returned 
to  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  of  which  he  became  Speaker 
in  1811  and  then  resigned  this  office  to  become  one  of  the 
Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  This  posi 
tion  he  filled  until  his  death  in  1845.  He  ranks  as  one  of  the 
ablest  men  that  ever  had  a  place  upon  the  bench.  He  was  a 
man  of  great  industry  and  of  unusual  mental  vigor.  Besides 
the  great  work  of  his  office  he  was  the  author  of  numerous  trea 
tises,  and  published  reports  of  his  decisions  on  the  circuit,  and 
was  the  leading  spirit  in  organizing  and  conducting  the  Law 
School  of  Harvard  College.  As  a  jurist  and  exponent  of  con 
stitutional  law  he  stood  in  the  front  rank,  not  only  in  his  own 
country,  but  also  in  Europe.  And  as  a  lecturer  and  the  author 
of  occasional  addresses  he  showed  high  literary  ability.  But 


24  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

with  all  his  great  work,  he  never  lost  his  naturalness,  his  ap- 
proachableness,  his  eager  thirst  for  knowledge  and  his  vivacity 
of  spirits  which  made  him  so  attractive  to  young  men.  His 
ready  wit  and  the  contagious  heartiness  of  his  laugh  were  as 
marked  as  the  purity  and  high  purpose  of  his  life. 

Sumner's  controlling  ambition  from  the  time  he  had  studied 
law  sufficiently  to  fix  a  plan  in  life,  until  1845,  was  to  be  a 
jurist.  He  never  appears  to  have  been  fitted  or  disposed  to  en 
gage  in  wrangling  disputes  at  the  bar.  Guided  by  Story's  ex 
ample,  his  aspiration  was  to  occupy  the  position  of  a  judge  or 
a  professor  in  the  Law  School;  and  be  known  as  Blackstone, 
Puffendorf  and  Kent  are  known. 

Much  friendship  was  also  shown  by  Professor  Ashmun  for 
Sumner.  Ashmun  being  younger  than  Story,  his  relation  to 
Sumner  approached  nearer  to  intimacy.  Sumner  seeing  him 
approach  one  day  quietly  remarked  to  a  fellow  student  that  he 
was  going  to  get  a  compliment  from  the  Professor.  When  he 
came  up  Sumner  politely  offered  him  a  chair,  and  after  the 
usual  salutations  and  a  little  other  talk,  commenced :  "  There  is 
a  lawyer  down  at  the  Cape  who  says  he  can  beat  any  man  in  the 
State  pleading,  but  that  Ashmun  ".  And  then,  with  a  look  of 
despondency,  added :  "  But  as  for  me  I  can't  plead.  I  don't 
know  anything  about  it ".  And  then  stopped  for  the  expected 
compliment.  But  the  Professor  answered :  "  No,  you  don't 
know  anything.  And  what  is  more,  you  never  will ". 

Ashmun's  health,  though  he  was  a  young  man,  was  even  at 
this  time  broken.  He  died  soon  after  of  consumption,  Sumner 
alone  being  with  him  at  the  time  of  his  death,  his  nurse  for 
the  night.  During  the  same  period  Sumner  met  with  a  nearer 
loss  by  death.  His  twin  sister  Matilda  died  March  sixth,  1830, 
also  of  consumption.  Professor  Ashmun  was  succeeded  by 
Simon  Greenleaf. 

Sumner  left  the  Law  School  in  December,  1833.  He  in 
tended  to  leave  earlier,  but  remained  at  the  suggestion  of  Judge 
Story.  He  wished  to  gain  a  more  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
practice  and  for  this  purpose  in  January,  1834,  he  entered  the 
law  office  of  Rand  &  Fisk  in  Boston.  Benjamin  Rand  under 
whose  immediate  tuition  he  was,  had  a  high  standing  at  the  bar 
for  judgment,  integrity  and  learning,  qualities  which  make  an 
able  counsellor,  but  he  does  not  seem  to  have  aspired  to  dis 
tinction  in  court  practice.  He  was  an  intimate  friend  of  Judge 
Story  whose  calls  at  the  office  during  the  unoccupied  portion 
of  their  time  were  always  occasions  when  Sumner  became  a 
willing  listener  to  the  conversation.  Sumner  gave  attention 
chiefly  to  the  details  of  office  work.  He  also  continued  his  con- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  25 

tributions  to  the  American  Jurist  and,  in  the  following  May, 
became  one  of  its  editors.  He  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  Sep 
tember,  1834,  at  Worcester,  there  being  no  court  in  session  at 
that  season  of  the  year  in  Boston  competent  to  grant  admis 
sions. 

From  the  middle  of  February  to  the  beginning  of  April, 
1834,  Sumner's  studies  in  the  law  office  were  interrupted  by  a 
visit  to  Washington,  undertaken  at  the  suggestion  of  Judge 
Story.  He  devoted  his  attention  while  there  chiefly  to  the 
Supreme  Court,  but  also  gave  some  to  Congress.  The  former 
was  then  the  scene  of  discussion  of  questions  which  have  since 
been  appealed  to  other  tribunals  and  are  now  incorporated  in 
our  political  history.  In  the  Senate,  in  1852,  when  advocating 
the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  Sumner,  in  referring  to 
this  visit/said :  "  Among  the  memories  of  my  youth  are  happy 
days  when  I  sat  at  the  feet  of  this  tribunal,  while  Marshall  pre 
sided,  with  Story  by  his  side  ". 

Congress  then  had  under  discussion  the  National  bank  ques 
tion,  which  attracted  so  much  attention,  during  Jackson's  Ad 
ministration.  Neither  before  nor  since  have  there  been  three 
such  men  there  to  discuss  any  question  as  Webster,  Calhoun 
and  Clay  who  were  there  then  in  their  prime.  Sumner  ad 
mired  the  attainments  of  all  of  them,  but  especially  the  graceful 
and  forcible  eloquence  of  Clay.  A  card  from  Mr.  Webster 
secured  him  a  seat  on  the  •  floor  of  the  senate  whenever  he 
wished  to  occupy  it. 

Judge  Story  opened  the  way  for  him  to  every  circle  and 
enabled  him  to  make  some  valuable  acquaintances.  Sumner 
met  the  Eeporters,  Wheaton  and  Peters,  he  dined  with  the 
Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  and  received  marks  of  attention 
from  Chief  Justice  Marshall,  whose  greatness  and  simplicity 
impressed  him.  He  there  met  for  the  first  time,  Eufus  Choate 
and  Francis  Lieber.  With  the  latter  he  became  an  intimate 
friend  and  a  frequent  correspondent.  On  his  return  home  he 
stopped  a  few  days  in  Philadelphia,  visiting  the  Reporter, 
Peters,  at  his  home  and  enjoying  some  other  hospitalities.  In 
passing  through  New  York  on  his  journey  to  Washington  he 
had  been  introduced  by  a  letter  from  Professor  Greenleaf  to 
James  Kent,  the  author  of  the  Commentaries  on  American  Law. 

He  returned  to  his  profession  with  more  love  for  it  and  a 
greater  dislike  for  politics,  little  thinking  what  an  arena 
Washington  was  to  be  for  him.  On  leaving  there,  he  wrote  to 
his  father :  "  I  probably  shall  never  come  here  again.  I  have 
little  or  no  desire  ever  to  come  again  in  any  capacity.  Nothing 
that  I  have  seen  of  politics  has  made  me  iook  upon  them  with; 


26  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

any  feeling  other  than  loathing.  The  more  I  see  of  them  the 
more  I  love  law  which  I  feel  will  give  me  an  honorable  liveli 
hood.  Mr.  Peters,  who  has  treated  me  with  great  friendship, 
told  me  when  I  was  remarking  to  him  as  above,  that  before 
1840  I  should  come  on  to  Washington  (if  I  were  willing)  to 
argue  some  causes  in  the  Supreme  Court.  This  anticipation, 
flattering  of  course,  was  dictated  undoubtedly  by  Judge  Story's 
friendly  recommendation  of  me.  However,  I  do  not  presume 
to  indulge  any  such  anticipations.  When  indulged  by  others  I 
let  them  pass  for  what  they  are  worth." 

Sumner's  personal  appearance  at  this  time  presented  a  re 
markable  contrast  to  that  of  his  maturer  years.  He  was  six 
feet  and  three  inches  tall;  but  weighed  only  a  hundred  and 
twenty  pounds.  He  was  stooped  in  his  carriage  and  awkward 
in  his  movements,  sprawling  rather  than  sitting  in  a  chair. 
His  hair  was  of  dark  brown  color,  his  eyes  blue  but  usually 
inflamed  by  excessive  use,  his  features  were  rough,  his  com 
plexion  sallow  and  indicated  a  want  of  sufficient  exercise. 
Nothing  redeemed  his  face  from  ugliness,  but  a  beautiful  set  of 
teeth  and  a  winning  smile  which  generally  secured  for  him  a 
favorable  impression  at  the  first  introduction. 

He  was  careless  of  his  general  appearance  and  gave  little 
attention  to  dress,  in  this  respect  differing  from  his  taste  in 
later  years  when  he  became  somewhat  particular  in  the  choice 
of  clothes.  He  had  little  imagination,  no  humor  and  cared 
nothing  for  athletic  games.  He  was  conscientious  in  his  con 
duct,  but  not  religious ;  he  believed  in  God,  but  seemed  to  have 
doubts,  which  later  in  life  were  removed,  of  the  divinity  of 
Christ.  He  had  decision  of  character  and  steadiness  of  purpose 
to  accomplish  a  desired  end.  His  qualities  of  mind  and  heart 
easily  secured  him  friends.  His  hearty  laugh,  his  appreciative 
disposition,  his  kindliness,  always  ready  to  do  a  favor  for  a 
friend,  the  charm  of  his  conversation,  his  scholarly  aspirations, 
his  freedom  from  sham,  his  real  worth,  were  qualities  which 
recommended  him  among  men. 

To  women  he  seemed  to  be  indifferent.  He  would  at  any 
time  turn  his  back  upon  the  loveliest  girl  to  talk  to  some  man 
who  could  tell  him  something  of  interest.  This  trait  of  his 
character  was  so  noticeable  that  his  friends  would  occasionally 
lay  wagers  with  sprightly  and  interesting  girls  that  they  could 
not  keep  him  at  their  side  a  quarter  of  an  hour.  Notwithstand 
ing  every  art  they  could  employ  the  girls  usually  lost  their  bets. 
Men  he  liked  best,  though  he  appreciated  sensible  and  intel 
ligent  women  not,  however,  because  they  were  women,  but  be 
cause  they  had  traits  of  character  which  he  admired. 


CHAPTEE  V 

LAW  PRACTICE EDITING  THE  JURIST OTHER  PUBLICATIONS 

INSTRUCTOR     IN     HARVARD     LAW     SCHOOL THE     FIVE     OF 

CLUBS 

IMMEDIATELY  upon  his  admission  to  the  bar,  Sumner  com 
menced  the  practice  of  his  profession  in  Boston.  His  first  case 
was  the  defence  of  a  man  indicted  for  sending  another  a  chal 
lenge  to  fight  a  duel.  The  trial  attracted  some  attention  and 
resulted  in  the  man  being  cleared.  A  newspaper  of  the  fol 
lowing  day  in  noticing  it  characterized  Sumner  as  "  a  young 
gentleman  more  deeply  read  in  the  law  than  any  other  in 
dividual  of  similar  age  ".  He  was  associated  in  the  case  with 
George  S.  Hillard,  who  was  near  his  own  age  but  had  been  ad 
mitted  to  the  bar  about  a  year  earlier.  In  the  November  fol 
lowing  Sumner  and  Hillard  formed  a  partnership  under  the 
firm  name  of  "  Hillard  &  Sumner  ".  Their  office  was  at  No.  4 
Court  Street.  Sumner  roomed  in  the  same  building  with 
Luther  S.  Gushing,  later  the  author  of  "  Cushing's  Manual  of 
Parliamentary  Practice  ".  He  took  his  meals  at  a  restaurant. 
Hillard  had  literary  tastes  and  a  genial  disposition  and  to 
gether  they  attracted  many  visitors  to  their  office.  Story  and 
Greenleaf  were  among  the  number;  the  latter  placed  a  desk 
there  calling  it  "  our  office  "  and  there  he  met  the  clients  he 
served  during  his  connection  with  the  Law  School. 

Pmt  visitors  were  more  numerous  than  clients.  Sumner's 
success  was  not  what  he  desired  nor  such  as  his  laborious  prep 
aration  for  the  profession  had  justified  him  in  expecting. 
The  number  of  his  cases  was  not  large  and  the  amount  involved 
in  many  of  them  was  small.  The  Jurist  and  the  Law  School 
occupied  a  considerable  portion  of  his  time.  Of  the  former  he 
continued  to  be  one  of  the  editors  and  in  the  latter  he  became 
an  instructor  and  during  a  great  part  of  the  year  spent  each 
alternate  day  in  Cambridge,  in  that  work.  These  were  serious 
obstacles  to  professional  success,  for  clients  are  quick  to  observe 
such  division  of  attention.  They  prefer  an  attorney  who  is 
always  to  be  found  at  his  desk,  ready  to  serve  them  with  single 
ness  of  purpose.  Sumner  thus  easily  drifted  away  from  his 
office.  It  was  his  ambition  to  be  a  Judge,  an  author  or  a 

27 


28  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

teacher,  in  his  profession,  rather  than  a  practitioner  and  he  came 
to  prefer  such  work  as  the  Jurist  and  the  Law  School  required. 

His  associates  in  the  work  of  editing  the  Jurist  were  Hillard 
and  Gushing.  It  was  as  its  name  indicates  a  legal  periodical, 
published  monthly  in  Boston  and  always  maintained  a  good 
standing  in  the  estimation  of  the  Bar  of  the  State.  It  numbered 
at  this  time  among  its  contributors  some  men  who  have  since 
gained  a  wide  reputation,  as  writers  upon  legal  subjects, — 
Simon  Greenleaf,  author  of  the  "  Law  of  Evidence ", 
Theophilus  Parsons,  author  of  the  "  Law  of  Contracts ", 
Theron  Metcalf  also  the  author  of  a  work  on  "  Contracts  " 
and  Willard  Phillips,  author  of  a  work  on  "  Insurance  ". 

A  large  share  of  the  work  of  editing  the  Jurist  fell  to 
Sumner.  It  is  not  now  possible  to  determine,  with  accuracy, 
his  contributions,  but  many  of  them  are  distinguishable,  the 
longer  ones  being  marked  with  his  initials,  and  the  shorter  ones, 
by  references  to  them  in  his  correspondence  and  by  peculiarities 
of  style.  They  are  all  carefully  written  and  show  the  author's 
familiarity  with  literature,  but  one  thing  is  noticeable  of  them, 
they  are  not  upon  strictly  legal  subjects.  He  preferred  to  write 
upon  the  literature  of  the  law  rather  than  upon  the  law  itself. 
His  articles  are  historical  sketches  of  libraries  and  law  schools, 
reviews  of  legal  publications,  propositions  for  legal  reform, 
rather  than  upon  the  law  of  real  property,  agency,  promissory 
notes,  etc. 

His  ability  and  industry  now  recognized,  were  sought  for  in 
other  directions.  During  1835  and  1836  he  edited  "  Andrew 
Dunlap's  Admiralty  Practice  ".  The  author,  the  U.  S.  District 
Attorney  for  Massachusetts,  had  just  completed  the  text  of  the 
\rork  when  he  was  seized  by  disease  with  such  violence  that  he 
was  compelled  to  resign  his  office  and  almost  entirely  refrain 
from  labor.  He  was  deeply  interested  in  his  book  and  longed 
to  complete  it.  His  inability  to  do  so  led  him  to  ask  the  as 
sistance  of  Sumner,  whose  fitness  for  the  work  he  recognized. 
Sumner  promptly  undertook  it  but  found  it  an  arduous  task. 
The  text  had  to  be  revised,  the  notes  written,  the  practical 
forms  added,  the  index  prepared  and  the  work  carried  through 
the  press.  Much  of  it  had  to  be  done  under  the  jealous  eye  of 
the  author  who  now  felt  that  this  book  would  be  his  only  claim 
to  the  consideration  of  posterity.  Sumner  gave  his  time  freely 
to  the  work.  The  practical  forms  which  are  a  considerable  and 
valuable  part  of  the  book,  he  contributed  to  it  himself.  Where 
they  could  be  found,  he  selected  them  from  other  books,  others 
he  adopted  from  those  which  had  been  approved  in  actual  prac 
tice,  some  he  prepared  himself.  They  are  now  the  standard 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  29 

forms  used  in  admiralty  practice.  The  work  was  so  great  that 
the  book  was  not  given  to  the  public  until  almost  a  year  after 
the  death  of  Mr.  Dunlap.  The  preface  he  dictated  four  days 
before  his  death  and  in  grateful  and  complimentary  terms  he 
then  acknowledged  the  assistance  of  Sumner. 

During  the  same  period  Sumner  prepared  for  Judge  Story 
the  index  to  his  "  Equity  Jurisprudence  ",  which  he  was  about 
to  publish.  In  1835,  Judge  Story  also  appointed  him  Reporter 
for  the  U.  S.  District  Court  over  which  he  presided.  In  this 
capacity,  he  published  three  volumes  of  Judge  Story's  decisions, 
known  as  "  Sumner's  Reports  ".  They  appeared  in  1836,  1837 
and  1841.  He  also  delivered  lectures  at  various  times,  but  they 
were  chiefly  upon  subjects  suggested  by  his  work  in  the  Law 
School,  as  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  The  Law  of 
Bailments,  etc.  He  was  an  occasional  contributor  to  the  North 
American  Review. 

Sumner  commenced  to  give  instruction  in  the  Harvard  Law 
School  in  January,  1835.  He  supplied  the  place  of  Judge 
Story,  during  the  portion  of  the  year  he  was  occupied  upon  the 
bench  of  the  Supreme  Court  at  Washington.  Sometimes  Pro 
fessor  Greenleaf  was  also  obliged  to  be  absent  during  the  same 
season  upon  professional  business,  he  having  left  an  extensive 
practice  in  Maine  to  assume  the  duties  of  his  professorship.  At 
such  times  the  whole  responsibility  of  the  Law  School  fell  upon 
Sumner.  In  discharging  his  duties  he  gave  instructions  both 
by  recitations  and  by  lectures.  The  textbooks  were  the  first 
two  volumes  of  "  Kent's  Commentaries  "  and  "  Starkie  on  Evi 
dence  ".  The  volumes  he  used  show  signs  of  careful  and 
thorough  study.  They  are  considerably  worn  and  contain  many 
references  in  pencil  on  the  margin.  This  is  especially  true  of 
the  first  volume  of  "  Kent's  Commentaries  ",  which  treats  of 
the  law  of  nations,  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  sources  of  municipal  law.  These  were  ever  afterwards 
favorite  subjects  of  study  with  Sumner.  Little  is  now  remem 
bered  of  his  method  of  instruction  and  this  is  evidence  that  it 
was  respectable  for  he  was  daily  exposed  to  a  comparison  with 
Story  and  Greenleaf. 

This  list  of  his  employments  shows  that  Sumner,  then  hardly 
twenty-five  years  of  age,  was  a  thoroughly  industrious  and  capa 
ble  young  man.  If  work  in  the  courts  did  not  come  to  him,  he 
was  willing  to  take  that  which  did,  even  though  it  brought  small 
returns  in  money.  He  was  faithful  to  his  early  ideals.  Work 
was  still  his  talisman.  He  was  extending  his  acquisition  of 
knowledge  and  widening  his  influence  and  adding  to  his  fame. 
He  was  cultivating  his  power  as  a  writer  and  speaker  and  lay- 


30  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

ing  deep  and  broad  a  foundation  for  the  future.  His  habits 
continued  good,  he  allowed  no  time  for  evil  associations,  he  kept 
himself  busy. 

As  usual  he  had  a  circle  of  warm  friends  about  him.  He 
and  his  college  classmates  had  drifted  apart  but  new  occupa 
tions  had  brought  new  associations  and  new  friends.  Though 
the  number  of  them  was  not  larger  than  falls  to  the  lot  of 
others,  his  devotion  to  them  was  a  marked  trait  of  his  character. 
It  would  be  difficult  to  find  another,  whose  time  was  so  care 
fully  husbanded,  who  was  so  willing  to  lay  aside  his  own  work 
to  entertain  or  assist  friends.  This  made  his  friendship  valua 
ble  even  to  a  man  of  prominence  and  wide  influence  like  Judge 
Story,  who  was  frequently  burdened  with  work  which  Sumner 
could  do  as  well  as  he.  Professor  Greenleaf  found  his  friend 
ship  equally  valuable. 

But  theirs  was  also  valuable  to  him.  Association  with 
them  corrected  his  ideals  and  communicated  to  him  the  lofty 
aspirations  by  which  they  were  inspired.  Their  wide  acquaint 
ance  among  influential  men  opened  up  new  avenues  of  acquaint 
ance  to  him.  His  experience  in  Washington  in  1834,  when 
Judge  Story  brought  him  to  the  notice  of  such  men  as  Chief 
Justice  Marshall  and  Mr.  Webster,  was  repeated  in  1836,  when 
he  made  a  tour  visiting  Providence,  New  York,  Albany,  Sara 
toga,  Niagara  Falls,  Montreal  and  Quebec,  returning  by  way 
of  Portland.  At  New  York,  he  dined  with  Judge  Kent,  the 
author  of  "  Kent's  Commentaries  ",  at  his  home  and  visited  the 
suburbs  of  the  city  with  him.  He  also  met  the  widow  of  Gover 
nor  De  Witt  Clinton  and  was  introduced  by  her  to  her  brother- 
in-law,  Judge  Ambrose  Spencer,  then  living  in  Albany  at  an 
advanced  age. 

Of  this  visit  he  wrote :  "  While  in  Albany,  I  saw  Judge 
Spencer,  who  received  me  kindly  because  he  understood  I  was 
Judge  Story's  friend ;  also  Johnson,  the  reporter,  who  is  one 
of  the  most  agreeable  and  gentlemanly  men  I  ever  met.  In 
deed  I  had  reason  to  think  of  Judge  Story  and  be  grateful  to 
him  every  step  ". 

At  Quebec  he  met  Judge  Sewell,  the  Chief  Justice  of  Lower 
Canada  and  Judge  Gaston,  the  famous  North  Carolinian.  He 
also  made  the  acquaintance  at  this  time  of  Thomas  Brown,  a 
young  English  advocate,  with  whom  he  afterwards  corre 
sponded  and  to  whom  he  was  to  be  indebted  for  kindness  when 
he  visited  Europe. 

The  friendships  Sumner  now  formed  were  lasting.  Francis 
Lieber,  whose  acquaintance  he  had  made  in  1834,  was  one  of  his 
most  frequent  correspondents.  This  correspondence  continued 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  31 

until  Lieber's  death  in  1872.  He  was  a  native  of  Berlin,  but 
came  to  this  country  while  still  a  young  man  and  remained 
until  his  death,  occupying  professorships  in  various  colleges. 
He  was  a  voluminous  writer  and  was  always  engaged  in  some 
literary  work.  His  best  known  productions  are  "  Civil  Liberty 
and  Self-Government  "  and  his  "  Political  Ethics  ".  He  was 
an  enthusiast  in  his  literary  work  but  sometimes  in  his  search 
for  materials  made  serious  drafts  upon  the  time  of  his  friends. 
Sumner,  however,  was  always  willing  to  assist  him  in  securing 
materials,  in  the  publication  of  his  books  and  in  procuring  a 
favorable  reception  for  them  from  the  public.  He  in  turn 
frequently  aided  Sumner  with  material  for  his  speeches  and 
was  ever  his  staunch  supporter  in  his  public  career. 

Sumner  and  four  of  his  friends  in  Boston  and  Cambridge, 
at  this  time  formed  an  association  which  they  called  the  "  Five 
of  Clubs  ".  The  members  were  Sumner,  Henry  R.  Cleveland, 
Cornelius  C.  Felton,  George  S.  Hillard  and  Henry  W.  Long 
fellow.  They  were  near  the  same  age,  Sumner,  the  youngest, 
being  twenty-six  and  Longfellow,  the  oldest,  thirty.  They  were 
all  talented  young  men  of  pure  lives  and  high  aspirations  and 
with  the  exception  of  Hillard  were  all  unmarried.  Cleveland 
was  a  teacher,  of  a  refined  and  sensitive  nature,  and  a  grace 
ful  writer,  but  he  died  six  years  later.  All  the  others  lived  to 
justify  their  early  promise;  Longfellow  became  a  great  poet; 
Felton,  president  of  Harvard  College  and  an  author;  Hillard, 
an  able  lawyer  and  a  legal  writer  of  note ;  all  are  known  as  men 
of  letters  and  made  an  impression  upon  their  generation  and 
left  national  reputations.  In  all  the  annals  of  literature 
there  can  hardly  be  found  an  association  more  beautiful  than 
that  of  these  young  men. 

They  usually  met  each  Saturday  afternoon,  at  the  room  of 
one  of  their  number  to  discuss  the  literature  of  the  day,  for 
eign  travel,  their  own  studies  and  to  spend  an  hour  in  friendly 
conversation.  Each  of  them  submitted  to  the  others,  his 
article  or  book  or  poem,  for  comment  and  criticism,  before  it 
was  given  to  the  public.  Longfellow  and  Cleveland  had 
travelled  extensively  in  Europe ;  and  the  others  longed  to  do  so 
and  were  interested  in  everything  that  was  said  of  the  scenes 
of  their  subjects  of  study.  A  table  spread  with  a  few  delicacies 
gave  an  additional  interest  to  their  meetings.  Their  conversa 
tion  was  interesting  and  instructive,  nothing  coarse,  and  the 
direst  company  would  have  been  jovial  under  the  influence  of 
the  hearty  laugh  and  joyous  spirit  of  Felton. 


CHAPTER  VI 

TRIP    TO    EUROPE — DISADVANTAGES — OPPOSITION    OF    FRIENDS — 

MOTIVES     FOR     TAKING     IT VOYAGE FRANCE LEARNING 

FRENCH SCHOOLS COURTS ASSEMBLIES 

FOR  years  Sumner  had  longed  to  make  a  trip  to  Europe. 
While  a  student  in  the  Law  School,  he  almost  completed  an 
arrangement  with  a  gentleman  by  which  his  expenses  for  such 
a  trip  were  to  be  borne,  in  consideration  of  services  to  be  ren 
dered  on  his  return.  Later  when  bantered  by  Mr.  Greenleaf 
about  "  the  perfect  woman  he  was  some  day  to  wed  ",  or  rallied 
by  his  friends  about  settling  down  in  life,  he  would  answer,  "  I 
am  married  to  Europa  ".  It  was  not,  however,  until  1837,  that 
his  wish  to  visit  Europe  became  a  settled  purpose. 

Such  a  trip  may  easily  be  made  an  appropriate  conclusion 
to  a  college  course.  It  is  an  excellent  preparation,  for  one,  who 
aspires  to  a  professorship  in  some  school  or  to  the  pursuit  of 
letters  or  to  a  life  of  elegant  ease.  In  no  other  place  can  a 
knowledge  of  a  modern  language  be  so  well  obtained  as  in  the 
country  where  it  is  spoken.  You  there  hear  it  used  continually, 
with  its  different  forms  of  expression  and  pronunciation  and 
you  can  so  locate  yourself  that  you  must  learn  to  speak  the  lan 
guage  or  have  no  communication  with  others.  A  knowledge  of 
it  thus  becomes  imperative  and  it  is  then  more  readily  acquired. 
An  acquaintance  with  the  people,  their  manners,  institutions 
and  literature  follows  easily  a  knowledge  of  their  language. 
Such  attainments  are  accomplishments  to  be  desired  by  any 
one. 

But  they  should  present  to  one  situated  as  Sumner  was 
another  consideration, — whether  a  professional  man,  to  acquire 
them,  would  be  justified  in  quitting  his  office  and  his  business, 
for  two  years,  after  having  fairly  commenced  his  career.  The 
law  is  a  jealous  mistress.  To  succeed,  one  must  be  willing  to 
dedicate  to  her  not  only  his  days  and  nights,  but  he  must  do 
it  with  every  energy  which  he  can  command.  Clients  cannot 
be  dismissed  and  recalled  at  pleasure.  To  establish  oneself 
well  in  the  legal  profession  generally  requires  years  of  labo 
rious  exertion.  Before  such  a  possession  is  bartered  away  for 
graceful,  but  unnecessary  accomplishments,  the  consequences 

33 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  33 

should  be  carefully  calculated.  So  far  as  Sumner's  law  practice 
was  concerned,  his  determination  to  spend  two  years  in  Europe 
was  a  mistake. 

His  friends  generally  discouraged  it.  He  was  much  hurt 
at  President  Quincy  of  Harvard  bluntly  telling  him,  that  all 
the  good  Europe  would  do,  would  be  to  teach  him  to  wear  a 
mustache  and  carry  a  cane.  Some  were  afraid  he  would  be 
spoiled  by  foreign  airs  and  manners ;  others  thought  that  the 
continued  novelty  and  excitement  of  so  long  a  stay  in  Europe 
would  wean  him  from  the  profession  to  which  he  had  been 
devoted  so  short  a  time.  Whatever  the  cause  may  have  been, 
the  fact  is  unquestioned,  that  Sumner  never  afterwards  actively 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  law.  His  friends,  however,  yielded. 
They  saw  his  desire  to  go  was  so  great  that  he  would  be  cast 
down  if  not  permitted  to  carry  out  his  purpose. 

For  an  absence  of  two  years  in  Europe  about  five  thousand 
dollars  was  required  to  defray  his  expenses.  Of  this  sum  his 
professional  savings  had  been  scarcely  one-third.  His  friends 
Judge  Story,  Samuel  Lawrence  and  Eichard  Fletcher  kindly 
loaned  him  the  balance.  To  secure  him  a  favorable  reception 
in  Europe,  friends  were  ready  to  give  him  letters  of  introduc 
tion.  Of  these  he  had  altogether  about  fifteen — to  some  of  the 
most  influential  persons  in  England  and  on  the  Continent. 
They  also  gave  him  such  counsel  and  information  as  they  could 
to  advance  the  purpose  of  his  trip.  Lieber  wrote  out  for  him 
a  number  of  rules  to  guide  him.  The  friends  who  at  first  dis 
couraged  his  trip,  when  he  had  determined  to  go,  generously 
furnished  him  every  means  in  their  power  to  make  it  profitable. 

The  discouragements  he  met  with,  made  Sumner  feel  the 
responsibility  of  the  step  he  was  taking.  He  wrote  to  Professor 
Greenleaf  the  day  before  he  sailed :  "  It  is  no  slight  affair  to 
break  away  from  business  which  is  to  give  me  my  daily  bread 
and  pass  across  the  sea  to  untried  countries,  usages  and  lan 
guages.  And  I  feel  now  pressing  with  a  mountain's  weight,  the 
responsibility  of  my  step.  But  I  go  abroad  with  the  firmest 
determination  to  devote  myself  to  self -improvement  from  the 
various  sources  of  study,  observation  and  society;  and  to  re 
turn  an  American.  Gladly  will  I  receive  any  of  those  accom 
plishments  or  modifications  of  character,  which  justly  proceed 
from  an  extended  survey  of  the  human  family,  I  pray  fervently 
that  I  may  return  with  benefits  on  my  head ;  and  that  the  affec 
tation  of  character  and  indifference  to  country  which  are 
thought  sometimes  to  proceed  from  travel  may  not  reach  me. 
All  this  is  in  the  unknown  future,  which  I  may  not  penetrate. 
To  the  candid  judgment  and  criticism  of  my  friends,  I  shall 


34  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

submit  myself  on  my  return;  and  I  shall  esteem  it  one  of  the 
highest  duties  of  friendship  to  correct  me  and  to  assist  in 
bringing  me  back  to  the  path  of  sense  and  simplicity,  if  it  shall 
be  found  that  I  have  departed  from  it.  Do  not  let  it  be  said 
then  that  I  shall  be  spoiled  by  Europe,  but  rather  suggest  that 
I  shall  return  with  an  increased  love  for  my  country  and  ad 
miration  for  its  institutions  and  an  added  capacity  for  per 
forming  my  duty  in  life.  My  standard  of  knowledge  and 
character  must  be  elevated  and  my  own  ambition  have  higher 
objects.  If  this  is  not  so  then  I  shall  have  seen  Europe  in  vain 
and  my  friends  may  regret  their  generous  confidence  in  me." 

Again  in  his  journal  of  the  day  he  set  sail  he  wrote :  "  And 
a  sad  time  it  was,  full  of  anxious  thoughts  and  doubts  with 
mingled  gleams  of  glorious  anticipations.  I  thought  much  of 
the  position  which  I  abandoned  for  the  present ;  the  competent 
income  which  I  forsook;  the  favoring  tide  whose  buoyant 
waters  were  bearing  me  so  well,  which  I  refused  to  take  even 
at  its  ebb ;  then  I  thought  of  the  advice  and  warnings  of  many 
whose  opinions  I  respect.  The  dear  friends  I  was  to  leave  be 
hind  all  came  rushing  before  me ;  and  affection  for  them  was  a 
new  element  in  the  cup  of  my  anxieties.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
the  dreams  of  my  bo}^hood  came  before  me,  the  long-pondered 
visions,  first  suggested  by  my  early  studies,  and  receiving  new 
additions  with  every  step  of  my  progress ;  my  desire  which  has 
long  been  above  all  other  desires,  to  visit  Europe ;  and  my  long 
cherished  anticipations  of  the  most  intellectual  pleasure  and  the 
most  permanent  profit.  Europe  and  its  reverend  history,  its 
ancient  races,  its  governments  handed  down  from  old  times,  its 
sights  memorable  in  story;  above  all  its  present  existing  in 
stitutions,  laws  and  society,  and  its  men  of  note  and  mind,  fol 
lowed  in  the  train, — and  the  thought  of  these  reassured  my 
spirits.  In  going  abroad  at  my  present  age,  and  situated  as  I 
am,  I  feel  that  I  take  a  bold,  almost  a  rash,  step.  One  should 
not  easily  believe  that  he  can  throw  off  his  clients  and  then 
whistle  them  back,  '  as  a  huntsman  does  his  pack  '.  But  I  go 
for  purposes  of  education  and  to  gratify  longings  which  prey 
upon  my  mind  and  time.  *  *  *  The  course  which  my  studies 
have  taken  has  also  made  it  highly  desirable,  that  I  should  have 
the  advantage  derived  from  a  knowledge  of  the  European  lan 
guages,  particularly  French  and  German,  and  also  a  moderate 
acquaintance  with  the  laws  and  institutions  of  the  Old  World 
more  at  least  than  I  can  easily  gain  at  home.  In  my  pursuits 
lately  I  have  felt  the  want  of  this  knowledge,  both  of  the 
languages,  particularly  German,  and  of  the  Continental  juris 
prudence.  I  believe  then  that  by  leaving  my  profession  now,  I 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  35 

make  a  present  sacrifice  for  a  future  gain;  that  I  shall  return 
with  increased  abilities  for  doing  good  and  acting  well  my  part 
in  life." 

These  passages  reveal  his  motives.  The  solution  is  found  in 
the  aspiration  which  Sumner  was  known  to  have  at  this  time. 
He  wished  to  occupy  a  professorship  in  the  Law  School  such 
as  Judge  Story  then  occupied  and  be  known  to  posterity  as  a 
writer  on  legal  subjects.  He  wished  to  study  law  as  a  science, 
not  to  practice  it  as  a  tradejlto  be  instrumental  in  reducing  its 
principles  to  something  like  symmetry  and  in  bringing  the  mass 
of  the  common-law  into  smaller  compass.  He  wished  to  have 
the  civil  and  criminal  law  both  codified  as  the  latter  has  been 
since,  in  many  of  the  States. 

Upon  the  subject  of  codification  he  was  enthusiastic.  In 
1836  he  was  appointed  by  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts 
with  Judge  Story  and  others  a  Committee  to  report  on  the 
advisability  of  such  a  reform  in  that  State.  Though  declining 
to  act  as  a  member  of  the  Committee  for  fear  of  the  imputation 
of  the  undue  influence  of  Judge  Story,  which  might  arise  from 
their  friendly  relations,  he  advocated  the  reform  in  the  Jurist 
and  sought  the  contributions  of  Professor  Mittermaier,  an 
eminent  German  law-writer,  in  presenting  similar  views  to  the 
public. 

He  wished  to  talk  on  this  subject  with  its  advocates  in  Eu 
rope.  He  wished  to  know  these  men  and  to  know  them  inti 
mately.  He  wished  to  see  them  in  their  schools,  hear  their 
lectures,  enter  with  them  into  the  spirit  of  their  work.  He 
wished  to  see  their  methods  of  instruction,  to  know  in  what  they 
excelled  and  introduce  their  reforms  into  his  own  country.  He 
wished  to  see  parliaments  and  assemblies  where  laws  were  made 
and  the  courts  where  they  were  administered  and  note  wherein 
they  differed  from  similar  institutions  of  his  own  country.  He 
intended  by  this  means  to  fit  himself  for  a  life-work. 

After  several  appointments  and  as  many  disappointments, 
Sumner  at  last  fixed  his  time  of  sailing,  in  the  early  part  of 
December,  1837.  During  November,  he  made  a  hurried  trip 
to  Portland,  Maine,  to  procure  some  promised  letters  of  intro 
duction  ;  and  another  to  Washington  to  be  made  the  bearer  of 
dispatches,  an  appointment  which  would  give  him  some  ad 
vantages.  He  sailed  by  the  Albany  on  December  eighth 
from  New  York.  The  evening  previous,  until  late,  he  spent  in 
writing  farewell  letters  to  friends.  He  had  received  many  from 
them  assuring  him  of  their  regard,  bidding  him  God-speed  and 
reminding  him  of  the  honorable  career  which  awaited  him  on 


36  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

his  return.  As  the  vessel  sailed  slowly  down  the  harbor  and 
out  to  sea,  he  stood  thoughtfully  on  deck,  watching  receding 
objects  till  one  after  another  disappeared  and  he  was  left  alone, 
with  all  he  loved  behind,  with  nothing  before  but  his  own 
bright  anticipations,  now  overshadowed  with  the  gloomy  fore 
bodings  of  his  friends. 

He  then  went  below.  Here  different  experiences  awaited 
him.  During  the  next  four  days  he  suffered  from  that  sick 
ness,  which  some  one  has  humorously  said  makes  a  man  feel 
at  first  afraid  he  will  die,  but  afterwards,  afraid  he  won't.  At 
the  end  of  that  time  he  had  so  far  recovered  as  to  be  able  to 
read  when  propped  up  in  his  berth  and  at  the  expiration  of  a 
week  he  could  go  below  to  his  meals.  During  the  remainder 
of  his  voyage  he  spent  his  time,  in  reading,  studying  French 
and  reviving  his  knowledge  of  chess  and  whist,  accomplish 
ments  of  his  college  days  which  he  had  put  aside  for  sterner 
tasks.  The  voyage  was  a  prosperous  one  and  on  the  evening  of 
December  twenty-fifth,  land  was  sighted.  Sumner  was  then 
in  the  English  Channel  and  the  dream  of  years  was  realized ! 

"  My  mind,"  he  wrote,  "  has  felt  a  thrill  under  the  associa 
tions  of  these  waters;  it  is  my  first  experience  of  the  rich 
memories  of  European  history.  On  my  left  now  are  the  chalky 
cliffs  of  England — Plymouth,  from  which  the  Pilgrim  ances 
tors  of  New  England  last  started  to  come  to  our  bleak  places ; 
also  the  Isle  of  Wight,  consecrated  by  the  imprisonment  of  the 
royal  Charles;  and  the  harbor  of  Portsmouth,  big  with  the 
navies  of  England.  On  my  right  is  la  belle  France  and  the 
smiling  province  of  Normandy ;  and  the  waters  which  now  bear 
this  American  ship  are  the  same  over  which  Caesar  with  his 
frail  boats,  and  afterwards  William  of  Normandy  passed  to 
the  Conquest  of  England.  Their  waves  dash  now  with  the  same 
foamy  crests  as  when  these  two  conquerors  timidly  entrusted 
themselves  to  their  bosom.  Civilization,  in  the  mean  time, 
with  its  attendant  servants — commerce,  printing  and  Christian 
ity — has  been  working  changes  in  the  two  countries  on  either 
side ;  so  that  Caesar  and  William,  could  they  re-visit  the  earth, 
might  not  recognize  the  lands  from  which  they  passed  or  which 
they  subdued.  The  sea  receives  no  impress  from  man." 

Owing  to  adverse  winds,  the  Albany  did  not  come  to  anchor 
at  Havre  until  December  twenty-eighth.  Sumner  then  went 
on  shore  and  spent  the  remainder  of  the  day  in  viewing  the  city. 
The  next  morning  he  started  for  Eouen,  talking  on  the  road 
to  the  driver  as  best  he  could,  with  his  imperfect  French.  He 
now  felt  the  need  of  the  language  to  be  able  to  appreciate  the 
objects  of  interest  about  him  and  he  was  determined  to  use 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  37 

it  and  thereby  extend  his  knowledge  of  it,  at  every  opportunity. 
The  next  day  was  spent  in  Rouen,  a  considerable  part  of  it  in 
viewing  the  Cathedral,  the  wonder  of  the  North  of  France, 
built  before  the  Conquest,  when  the  knowledge  of  the  arts  and 
sciences  seems  to  us  to  have  been  in  its  infancy ;  and  yet  it 
appears,  to  the  traveller  to-day,  as  great  an  achievement  in 
architecture  as  it  must  have  been  to  its  builders.  He  also 
visited  the  Hotel  de  Ville.  In  its  library,  he  was  struck  with  a 
manuscript  he  saw,  made  on  parchment  by  an  obscure  monk, 
before  the  discovery  of  the  art  of  printing.  The  work  was  a 
collection  of  the  music  used  in  their  service,  of  no  substantial 
value,  and  yet  the  labor  of  transcribing  it  consumed  thirty  years 
of  time — almost  a  whole  human  life,  wasted! 

Anxious  to  see  at  their  height  the  great  gambling  hells,  which 
were  to  be  abolished  throughout  France  on  the  first  of  January, 
Sumner  set  out  for  Paris  on  the  morning  of  December  thirty- 
first  and  reached  there  at  twilight  in  the  evening, — in  time  to 
see  the  dens,  in  their  greatest  pride,  fade  away  before  the  law. 
In  the  journal  which  he  commenced  with  his  voyage  and  con 
tinued  for  four  months  he  has  recorded  the  scene : 

"  I  went  about  ten  o'clock  to  Frascati's, — the  great  "  hell  "  of 
Paris.  Passing  through  an  outside  court,  and  then  a  short 
entry,  we  entered  an  antechamber,  where  there  were  a  large 
number  of  servants  in  livery  who  received  our  hats  and  outside 
garments,  no  one  being  allowed  to  enter  the  gambling  saloon 
with  either.  The  hats  already  hanging  up  and  in  the  custody 
of  the  servants  seemed  innumerable,  and  yet  the  servants  had 
no  numbers  or  marks  by  which  to  indicate  to  whom  each  hat 
belonged,  trusting  entirely  to  recollecting  the  countenance. 
The  door  of  the  saloon  was  then  opened;  and  the  first  table 
of  gamblers  was  before  us — men  young,  middle-aged  and  old, 
with  the  bloom  of  youth  yet  mantling  the  face  and  with  the 
wrinkles  and  gray  hair  of  age.  This  table  was  a  roulette,  I  be 
lieve.  It  was  about  the  size  of  a  common  billiard  table,  and  it 
was  completely  surrounded  by  a  double  and  triple  row  of 
persons ;  the  first  row  sitting,  and  the  others  standing.  Among 
those  sitting  were  two  or  three  women  of  advanced  age,  and 
moving  about  the  room  were  several  younger,  undoubtedly 
Cyprians,  possessing  considerable  personal  attractions." 

"  Passing  into  the  next  saloon  through  an  open  door,  we 
found  a  larger  table,  with  players  more  intent  and  more  numer 
ous,  where  the  game  turned  upon  cards.  The  silver  and  gold 
spread  on  the  table  was  a  vast  amount,  and  I  saw  one  man,  with 
a  lip  that  quivered  and  a  hand  that  trembled,  stake  his  double 
handful  of  gold  on  a  single  throw, — amounting  to  many  hun- 


38  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

dred  dollars.  Little  wooden  rakes  or  hoes  were  used  to  draw 
the  money  in.  The  third  saloon  had  a  table  where  the  chance 
turned  upon  dice/' 

"  It  was  a  scene  which  I  am  glad  to  have  witnessed.  The 
excitements  of  gambling  have  been  said  to  be  strong;  and  I 
can  understand  how  persons  have  been  drawn  by  its  fascinations 
within  the  terrible  maelstrom.  They  try  once  for  experiment, 
and  are  seduced  by  a  momentary  success,  or  excited  by  a  loss 
and  observing  others  perhaps  winning  large  sums,  they  are 
finally  absorbed  in  the  whirling  vortex.  Several  of  the  friends 
that  I  went  with  ventured  several  francs,  and  alternately  lost 
and  won.  I  am  free  to  confess  that  I  felt  the  temptation  but 
I  restrained  my  hand.  To-night  being  the  last  night,  the  rooms 
were  very  full,  the  gamblers  wishing  to  have  their  last  game. 
We  left  sometime  before  midnight,  thinking  that  there  might 
be  some  disturbance  at  that  time,  when  the  transforming  wand 
of  the  law  would  exercise  its  power.  I,  however,  walked  the 
boulevards,  which  were  splendidly  illuminated  by  the  shop  win 
dows  till  long  after  midnight,  as  well  as  thronged  by  people; 
and  at  twelve  o'clock  I  stood  before  Frascati's.  The  people 
were  retiring  from  within,  and  as  the  women  came  out  they 
were  subjected  to  the  sneers  and  jeers  of  a  considerable  crowd 
who  had  collected  in  the  street  about  the  gateway.  A  few  of 
the  police  were  present  who  at  once  interfered  to  prevent  the 
uproar;  and  in  a  few  minutes  three  horsemen  rode  into  the 
crowd,  and  speedily  dispersed  them.  Such  was  the  last  night  of 
Frascati,  and  my  first  night  in  Paris." 

During  his  first  weeks  in  Paris,  Sumner  pursued  indus 
triously  the  study  of  the  French  language.  He  had  studied  it 
while  in  college  and  could  read  it  with  some  accuracy,  but  he 
had  thus  far  made  little  effort  to  learn  to  speak  it.  He  re 
frained  from  presenting  the  letters  of  introduction  which  he  had 
to  various  persons  in  Paris  and  he  declined  invitations  into 
society,  until  he  could  use  the  language.  He  engaged  lodging 
in  a  quiet  part  of  the  city  so  that  he  would  have  a  place  where 
he  could  hear  nothing  else  spoken  and  so  be  compelled  to  talk 
French  or  have  no  communication  with  those  about  him.  Here 
he  engaged  two  teachers  with  whom  he  could  take  lessons  and 
converse  at  different  hours  of  the  day.  When  he  went  for  a 
walk,  he  would  take  the  child  of  one  of  his  teachers  to  talk  to ; 
he  conversed  with  people  he  met  by  the  way.  "  My  rule,"  he 
wrote,  "  is  to  practise  upon  everybody,  to  take  every  opportu 
nity  to  speak  the  language,  even  if  it  be  but  a  word,  for  every 
time  of  trial  gives  me  assurance  and  also  adds  to  my  stock  of 
words  and  phrases." 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  39 

He  frequented  reading-rooms  and  public  lectures  in  the 
schools  of  medicine  and  law.  He  also  attended  theatres,  pur 
chasing  at  the  door  a  copy  of  the  play  so  that  he  could  follow 
the  performance  and  thus  familiarize  himself  with  the  sound 
of  the  spoken  language.  Of  course  he  made  rapid  progress  in  a 
study  pursued  so  persistently.  He  had  entered  France  on  De 
cember  twenty-eighth  and  on  January  twelfth,  he  recorded  in 
his  journal,  on  returning  from  a  lecture  at  the  law  school,  that 
he  could  understand  nearly  all  the  lecturer  said.  On  February 
fourteenth,  after  an  evening  spent  in  the  society  of  some  friends 
he  again  recorded  that  all  were  kind  enough  to  remark  that  he 
had  gained  a  great  deal  of  French  and  were  astonished  at  his 
progress.  "  I  just  begin  to  enjoy  conversation/'  said  he,  "  and 
the  sensation  is  delightful."  Thenceforward  he  was  frequently 
in  society  and  soon  became  at  ease  in  the  use  of  the  language. 

Whatever  furnished  self-improvement  seemed  to  have  an  at 
traction  for  him.  As  he  drifted  into  the  dock  at  Havre,  with 
the  tide  and  a  gentle  wind,  he  marked  the  "noble  work  con 
trived  for  the  reception  of  vessels  and  bearing  the  inscription 
of  e  An.  IX  Bonaparte  1°  Consul '  ",  the  labor  of  this  great  man 
meeting  him  on  the  threshold  of  France.  At  Paris  he  ascended 
the  monument  in  the  Place  Vendome.,  conceived  and  built  by 
Napoleon,  and  he  recorded  in  the  journal  of  the  day :  "  It  is 
composed  of  the  cannon  taken  at  Austerlitz.  There  is  a  genius 
characteristic  of  Napoleon  in  making  the  conquered  cannon 
into  a  monument  of  victory;  and  the  monument  is  a  most 
beautiful  one.  It  is  an  imitation  of  the  pillar  of  Trajan  at 
Eome  of  which  it  preserves  the  proportions  on  a  scale  larger 
by  a  twelfth." 

He  visited  the  Hospice  des  Enfants  Trouves,  since  discon 
tinued,  and  of  it  he  wrote :  ee  This  is  the  receptacle  of  the 
foundlings  of  Paris ;  and  upwards  of  one  hundred  are  left  here 
each  week,  making  more  than  six  thousand  during  the  year. 
The  argument  for  such  establishments  is  that  they  prevent  in 
fanticide  by  furnishing  an  asylum  for  infants.  There  is  a 
little  box  with  a  green  cushion,  about  large  enough  for  an 
infant,  which  opens  on  the  street ;  into  this  the  child  is  put  by 
the  parent  or  other  person  entrusted  with  it,  and  at  the  same 
time  the  box  is  turned  round,  a  bell  being  made  to  ring  by  the 
act  of  turning,  and  the  little  thing  is  received  into  its  new 
asylum.  If  the  infant  is  well  it  is  very  soon  put  out  to  nurse 
in  the  country.  There  were  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  in  the 
Hospice.  It  was  a  strange  sight  to  see  so  many  children  all  of 
an  age,  ranged  in  rows,  in  their  little  cradles.  There  was  a 
large  number  with  sick  eyes,  and  many  with  other  complaints. 


40  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

The  curtains  of  many  were  drawn  aside  that  I  might  see  them. 
In  one  cradle  I  observed  that  the  countenance  was  pallid  and 
the  mouth  open,  and  I  said  to  my  attendant,  '  Elle  est  morte/ 
The  attendant  doubted,  and  thought  that  she  perceived  a 
breath  from  the  mouth.  I  touched  the  cheek;  and  it  was  very 
evident  that  the  poor  child  was  dead, — it  was  as  cold  as  marble. 
It  was  melancholy  to  see  even  an  infant  that  had  died  without 
any  attendant  affectionately  watching;  and  who  breathed  its 
last,  with  the  curtains  of  its  little  cradle  closed  against  all 
sight." 

But  the  schools  and  the  courts  seemed  to  be  the  most  attract 
ive  places  to  Sumner  and  there  he  spent  much  of  his  time, 
after  learning  the  language.  During  his  stay  in  Paris  he  at 
tended  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  lectures,  delivered  in  the 
schools  by  many  of  the  most  eminent  teachers  in  France.  His 
journal  and  letters  abound  in  references  to  them,  describing 
most  of  the  lecturers  and  their  manner  and  method  and  his 
estimate  of  their  merits.  He  usually  attended  one  or  two  of 
these  lectures  each  forenoon.  The  manner  of  giving  instruction 
seemed  to  be  of  especial  interest  to  him  and  to  obtain  informa 
tion  upon  this  subject  he  did  not  confine  himself  merely  to  the 
schools  of  law,  his  own  profession,  but  those  of  medicine  and 
the  sciences  were  equally  to  his  purpose.  The  hospitals  which 
gave  Paris  especial  advantages  for  the  study  of  medicine  and 
hence  attracted  the  most  gifted  men  in  the  profession  and 
large  numbers  of  students,  often  found  him  there,  joining  a 
class  and  with  it  following  the  professor  through  the  different 
wards,  witnessing  the  surgical  operations  performed  and  all 
kinds  of  diseases  treated  and  explained  to  the  class,  which  he 
still  attended,  to  hear  the  lecture  following,  in  the  lecture  room. 

Everywhere  it  was  work  and  activity  for  him  from  early 
morning  until  late  at  night,  his  bedtime  usually  being  about 
midnight  or  one  A.  M.  He  wrote  to  Judge  Story  at  the  end 
of  his  first  six  weeks  in  Paris :  "  All  my  hours  are  occupied 
far  into  the  watches  of  the  night.  So  far  as  labor  is  con 
cerned,  I  should  much  prefer  to  be  again  in  my  office  dealing 
with  clients  and  familiar  law  books.  Travelling  with  my  de 
sires  and  determination  is  no  sinecure.  I  am  obliged  to  hus 
band  all  my  minutes/' 

Having  learned  the  language  so  he  could  use  it  with  some 
facility,  during  the  first  two  months  of  his  stay  in  Paris,  he 
then  left  his  comfortable  but  retired  room  in  the  Latin  quarter 
of  the  city  and  found  lodging  on  one  of  the  Boulevards,  where 
he  could  see  more  of  the  life  of  the  metropolis.  His  letters  of 
introduction,  several  in  number,  not  thus  far  used  he  now 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  41 

hastened  to  present.  Foelix,  the  editor  of  a  law  magazine  and 
the  author  of  a  work  on  the  Conflict  of  Laws,  he  had  been 
brought  into  contact  with  by  his  work  upon  the  Jurist  and 
they  had  exchanged  letters  before  Sumner  went  to  Europe. 
Immediately  upon  arriving  in  Paris,  he  had  sought  him  out. 
He  found  him  living  quietly  with  two  maiden  sisters,  one  of 
them  well  read  in  the  law,  able  to  converse  in  English  and  an 
accomplished  assistant  of  her  brother  in  his  editorial  work. 
Foelix  was  a  Prussian  by  birth  but  being  banished  from  his 
native  country  for  political  causes,  he  had  come  to  Paris  and 
was  naturalized  as  a  citizen.  He  was  enthusiastic  upon  the 
subject  of  codification  and  absorbed  in  the  work  of  his  peri 
odical.  Sumner  was  frequently  in  his  company,  while  in  Paris, 
and  by  him  he  was  introduced  to  many  men  of  eminence  and 
otherwise  shown  much  kindness. 

Sumner  carried  a  letter  of  introduction  from  Dr.  Channing 
to  Baron  de  Gerando,  a  lecturer  in  the  law  school,  a  Councillor 
of  State,  a  Peer,  and  also  a  writer  of  some  note.  Lewis  Cass 
was  then  our  French  Minister  and  he  and  his  wife,  being 
wealthy,  entertained  handsomely.  Being  the  bearer  of  dis 
patches  from  his  government,  Surnner  was  brought  at  once  into 
contact  with  him.  George  Ticknor,  who  had  been  Professor 
of  French  and  Spanish  Literature  at  Harvard,  while  Sumner 
was  in  College,  with  his  wife,  a  most  accomplished  and  attract 
ive  woman,  was  also  in  Paris  during  the  first  two  months  of 
Sumner's  stay.  With  all  these  he  dined.  He  thus  enlarged 
his  circle  of  acquaintances.  These  were  his  means  of  access 
to  French  Society,  few  enough  it  would  seem.  But  he  had  been 
accustomed  to  the  best  society  which  Cambridge  and  Boston 
afforded  and  with  his  ambition  to  learn  and  his  enthusiastic 
appreciation  of  all  that  was  pure  and  good  he  needed  only 
to  have  an  entrance  and  thenceforward  his  own  merit  opened 
the  avenues  he  desired. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  how  he  succeeded.  He  met,  upon 
friendly  terms,  Cousin,  the  writer  upon  ethics  and  philosophy, 
was  called  upon  by  him  and  with  him  discussed  the  merits  of 
the  writers  upon  kindred  subjects  in  the  United  States.  Sis- 
mondi,  the  historian,  and  Pardessus,  the  writer  upon  Commer 
cial  and  Maritime  Law,  both  received  him  kindly.  He  was 
entertained  by  Demetz,  a  Judge  and  afterwards  the  founder 
of  the  Reform  School  for  boys  at  Mettray,  where  Sumner  again 
met  him  in  1857  and  was  impressed  by  his  remark  that <  he  had 
renounced  his  position  as  Judge,  thinking  there  was  something 
more  for  him  to  do  than  to  continue  rendering  judgments  of 
courts ;  that  he  had  the  happiness  of  being  a  Christian  and  that 


42  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

it  was  of  much  more  importance  to  him  what  the  good  God 
would  think  of  him  than  what  men  thought." 

He  was  presented  to  Madame  Murat,  ex-queen  of  Naples,  the 
sister  of  Napoleon  and  widow  of  his  great  Captain  of  Cavalry. 
His  journal  notes :  "  She  is  now  at  Paris  to  prosecute  a  claim 
against  the  Government  for  the  Palais  de  PElysee  Bourbon. 
She  is  full  sixty,  but  appears  to  be  forty-five.  She  received  me 
quite  cordially  in  her  bedroom  where  there  were  already  three 
or  four  ladies,  and,  in  the  true  French  style,  was  pleased  to 
compliment  me  on  my  French;  when,  indeed,  I  spoke  wretch 
edly, — not  speaking  as  well  as  I  might,  for  I  felt  a  little  awe 
at  the  presence  in  which  I  found  myself.  She  is  rather  stout, 
with  a  free,  open,  pleasant  countenance  and  ready  smile.  Pres 
ently  some  Marquis  or  other  titled  man  was  announced  and 
she  said,  f  C'est  terrible'  and  rose  and  passed  to  the  salon, 
where  she  received  him.  Her  countenance  had  the  roundness 
which  belonged  to  Napoleon,  but  none  of  his  marble-like  grav- 

J  * 

Sumner  also  saw  and  heard  Dupin,  the  first  lawyer  of 
France,  then  President  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  and  also 
saw  Guizot  and  Thiers,  the  historians.  The  newspapers  oc 
casionally  noticed  his  presence  at  a  trial  or  a  lecture ;  and  at  a 
public  banquet  he  attended,  the  presiding  officer  noticed  his 
presence  in  some  complimentary  remarks,  which  were  applauded 
by  the  company. 

Sumner  spent  much  of  his  time  during  the  last  two  months 
in  Paris  at  the  Assemblies  and  the  courts.  At  the  former, 
through  the  kindness  of  Gerando,  himself  a  Peer,  he  was  hon 
ored  with  a  seat  in  the  box  in  the  Chamber  of  Peers.  And  in 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  through  the  kindness  of  another 
friend,  he  was  given  a  seat  in  the  reserved  tribune.  With 
these  opportunities  for  hearing  and  seeing,  he  could  closely 
observe  the  proceedings.  He  was  impressed  with  the  dignity 
and  moderation  in  partisanship  which  characterized  the  de 
bates  and  the  apparent  regard  for  the  public  welfare. 

But  he  was  still  more  interested  in  watching  the  operation 
of  the  Code  Napoleon  in  the  courts.  He  was  enthusiastic  in 
its  praise.  He  observed  closely  the  procedure  in  the  courts. 
At  this  time  he  contemplated  writing  a  book  on  the  compar 
ative  procedures  in  the  courts  of  England,  France  and  the 
United  States.  He  thought  the  French  bar  inferior  in  learning 
to  our  own  and  their  literature  of  the  law  confined  almost 
exclusively  to  commentaries  on  their  Code  and  the  Eoman  law. 
And  his  impression  was  that  the  French  nation  was  behind  our 
own  in  its  courts  and  laws. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  43 

To  Judge  Story  he  wrote :  "  At  present  I  am  attending  the 
courts.  Indeed  a  French  court  is  a  laughable  place.  To  me  it 
is  a  theatre  and  all  the  judges,  advocates  and  parties  '  merely 
players/  In  those  particulars  in  which  they  have  borrowed 
from  the  English  law,  they  have  got  hold  of  about  half  the 
English  principle  and  forgotten  the  rest.  Thus  they  have 
juries.  These  they  imported  from  England;  but  with  them, 
none  of  the  regulations  by  which  the  purity  of  our  verdicts  is 
secured.  *  *  *  There  was  nothing  like  cross-examination;  and 
I  have  reason  to  believe  that  this  test  of  truth  is  entirely  un 
known  to  the  French  procedure.  All  the  questions  were  put  by 
the  presiding  judge,  who,  however,  took  no  notes  of  the  answers : 
and  the  questions  were  general,  such  as  names  and  times  being 
altered  would  apply  to  all  cases.  *  *  *  Papers  of  all  kinds  are 
admitted.  You  will  see  from  these  words  that  the  duties  of 
the  judge  and  advocate  are  infinitely  abridged;  the  lawyer  giv 
ing  his  chief  attention  to  his  pleading  and  the  presiding  judge 
putting  a  series  of  questions  which  have  been  digested  before 
hand.  Neither  judge  nor  lawyer  is  obliged  '  to  watch  the  cur 
rent  of  the  heady  fight/  as  with  us,  where  almost  every  word 
of  testimony  makes  its  way  against  the  serried  objections  of 
opposing  counsel." 

His  journal  of  March  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  contains  a 
description  of  a  trial  which  he  attended  at  Versailles,  in  the 
company  of  his  friend,  Ledru,  one  of  the  attorneys  for  the  de 
fendant  :  "  The  prisoner,"  he  wrote,  "  was  a  young  man  of 
eighteen,  who  was  charged  with  killing  his  mistress.  It  seems 
that  the  two,  according  to  a  French  fashion,  tired  of  life,  agreed 
mutually  to  kill  each  other.  The  pistol  of  the  prisoner  took 
effect  and  the  girl  was  killed;  but  hers  did  not  take  effect. 
The  prisoner  then  tried  to  kill  himself  but  was  finally  arrested 
before  he  had  consummated  his  project.  *  *  *  The  first  step 
was  the  reading  of  the  act  of  accusation  or  indictment  by  the 
clerk.  The  names  of  all  the  witnesses  were  then  called.  They 
were  very  numerous  and  were  all  sent  into  an  adjoining  room. 
Among  them  was  the  mother  of  the  prisoner  and  also  the 
mother  of  the  deceased.  The  prisoner  himself  was  first  exam 
ined  very  minutely  by  the  judge  and  detailed  all  the  important 
circumstances  of  his  life,  his  education  and  of  his  final  com 
mission  of  the  offence,  with  which  he  was  charged.  He  gave  all 
the  particulars  fully.  This  examination  was  conducted  en 
tirely  by  the  senior  judge.  The  prisoner  cried  while  telling  his 
story,  and  did  not  speak  loud  enough  to  be  distinctly  heard  by 
the  jury.  He  was  then  removed  from  the  witness  stand.  The 
judge  next  read  the  examination  of  the  prisoner  on  his  first 


44  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

apprehension,  and  then  the  testimony  given  by  physicians  at 
the  first  examination.  Witnesses  were  then  introduced  one  by 
one;  *  *  *  by  the  judge.  The  few  questions  put  by  counsel  on 
either  side  were  through  the  mouth  of  the  judge;  and  there 
were  not  half  a  dozen  during  the  whole  trial,  and  to,  perhaps, 
thirty  witnesses.  The  first  set  of  witnesses  proved  the  previous 
character  of  the  accused;  the  second  set  the  same  of  the  de 
ceased.  Next  came  the  doctors  and  then  the  persons  who  found 
the  body  and  the  prisoner.  Members  of  the  jury  asked  ques 
tions  when  they  pleased;  and  all  or  nearly  all,  had  a  little 
piece  of  paper  on  which  to  make  notes.  The  examination  of 
witnesses  was  completed  the  first  day,  and  the  court  adjourned 
at  about  five  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  jury  separated 
without  any  injunction  not  to  converse  on  the  subject  of  the 
trial;  but  on  the  adjournment  mingled  among  the  crowd/' 

"  March  seventeenth.  At  ten  o'clock  the  court  again  con 
vened.  One  of  the  morning  papers  contained  a  full  report  of 
the  doings  of  yesterday.  My  friend  the  counsel  of  the  prisoner, 
anticipating  it  last  night,  enjoined  upon  his  servant  to  bring 
from  Paris  a  dozen  copies  of  the  paper  containing  the  report 
to  distribute  among  the  jury.  I  told  him  he  would  commit  a 
crime,  according  to  English  and  American  law, — '  Embracery  ' ; 
but  he  laughed  at  the  idea.  This  forenoon  the  Procureur- 
General  first  spoke,  then  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner;  then 
again  the  Procureur,  and  again  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner. 
I  understood  that  they  had  a  right  to  speak  as  many  times  as 
they  chose,  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner  always  having  the  last 
word.  In  the  arguments  there  was  nothing  such  as  I  have  been 
accustomed  to;  everything  was  different.  The  defence  was 
theatrical,  brilliant,  French.  The  counsel  grasped  the  hand  of 
his  client,  and  worked  the  whole  audience  into  a  high  pitch  of 
excitement.  At  the  close  of  his  argument  he  called  upon  his 
client  to  promise  in  the  face  of  the  court  and  of  God,  that,  if 
he  were  restored  to  liberty,  by  the  verdict  of  the  jury  he  would 
hasten  to  precipitate  himself  upon  the  tomb  of  the  unfortunate 
girl  he  had  destroyed  and  pray  for  forgiveness;  and  the  pris 
oner,  by  way  of  response,  stretched  his  hand  to  his  counsel, 
who  seized  it  with  a  strong  grasp,  saying  at  once,  '  J'ai  fini.' 
Women  screamed  and  fainted,  strong  men  yielded,  and  tears 
flowed  down  the  cheeks  of  the  jury  and  even  the  grim  coun 
tenances  of  the  half  dozen  police,  or  gendarmes  who  sat  by  the 
side  of  the  prisoner,  elevated  and  within  the  observation  of  all 
the  audience.  The  arguments  concluded,  the  judge  sitting 
.(and  the  jury  sitting)  read  a  very  succinct  statement  of  the 
case,  and  the  law  which  bore  upon  it.  This  occupied  perhaps 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  45 

five  or  ten  minutes.  The  jury  then  retired  and  within  less  than 
ten  minutes  returned.  The  prisoner,  in  the  meantime,  had 
been  conducted  to  a  room  out  of  the  court  room.  The  jury 
rendered  their  verdict,  '  Not  Guilty ' ;  the  prisoner  was  then 
brought  in  and  the  judge  communicated  the  decision  to  him, 
dismissing  him  with  an  impressive  admonition.  The  greatest 
excitement  prevailed  in  the  court  room  when  the  verdict  was 
announced.  Women,  and  men  too,  cried  for  joy.  So  much  for 
a  French  criminal  trial !  " 

These  things  show  the  employment  of  Sumner  during  his 
stay  in  France.  He  left  May  twenty-ninth,  1838,  for  London. 
He  had  learned  to  speak  the  French  language  with  considerable 
freedom  and  resolved  to  study  it  further  in  England  and  make 
it  a  permanent  acquisition.  He  had  seen  the  courts  and  schools, 
assemblies  and  theatres,  he  had  visited  the  cathedrals  and  spent 
some  time  in  her  famous  art  galleries  and  in  viewing  her  pub 
lic  monuments  and  works.  But  perhaps  the  most  interesting 
of  all  to  him  was  the  opportunity  he  enjoyed  of  seeing  and  be 
coming  acquainted  with  many  of  her  scholars  and  eminent  men. 
With  some  of  them  he  afterwards  corresponded.  To  the  recol 
lections  of  this  brief  life  in  Paris,  he  ever  after  turned,  as  a 
solace,  during  his  after  years  of  toil. 


CHAPTER  VII 

LONDON THE  CLUBS PARLIAMENT THE  COURTS JUDGES, 

DENMAN,    LITTLEDALE    AND    OTHERS SOCIETY,    MACAULAY, 

CARLYLE,   HALLAM — SERVICES    FOR   FRIENDS ON    THE    CIR 
CUITS — BROUGHAM LONDON  AGAIN 

AN  important  part  of  the  life  of  Simmer  is  his  first  visit  to 
England.  No  biography  of  him  would  be  complete  without  a 
considerable  mention  of  it.  It  was  different  from  the  visit  of 
most  Americans  to  England,  so  many  undertake  it  from  motives 
of  simple  pleasure  and  are  satisfied  with  a  hurried  view  of  the 
places  that  are  usually  seen  by  tourists.  But  it  must  be  kept 
in  mind  that  Sumner's  purpose  was  different.  He 'sought  solid 
instruction,  not  mere  rest  from  labor;  and  permanent  improve 
ment,  not  the  mere  amusement  of  an' idle  hour^  No  part  of  his 
early  education  was  more  fruitful  of  results.  He  saw  England 
as  few  young  Americans  have  ever  been  permitted  to  see  it  and 
the  taste  it  gave  him  of  the  real  life  of  the  eminent  Judges 
and  barristers  and  Lords  and  Commoners,  men  high  in  author 
ity,  created  with  him  a  different  view  of  office  and  high  position 
from  that  he  had  before  entertained.  It  is  fortunate  that  we 
have  so  full  a  record  of  his  daily  occupations  and  experiences 
as  has  been  preserved  to  us  by  his  letters.  They  give  the  reader 
delightful  glimpses  of  English  private  life  in  places  not  easily 
accessible  to  travellers  and  thus  have  a  value  apart  from  our 
interest  in  the  story  of  Sumner's  life. 

He  reached  England  on  the  thirty-first  day  of  May,  1838,  and 
remained  until  March  twenty-second,  1839,  almost  a  year. 
He  came  from  Calais  by  way  of  the  river  Thames,  directly  to 
London.  "  My  friends,  English  and  American,"  he  wrote,  "  ad 
vised  me  to  take  this  route,  and  enter  London  by  the  gate  of 
the  sea;  and  I  feel  that  the  advice  was  good.  I  waked  up  in 
the  morning  on  board  the  small  steamer  and  I  found  her  scud 
ding  along  the  shores  of  Kent.  There  were  England's  chalky 
cliffs  full  in  sight, — steep,  beetling,  inaccessible,  and  white. 
Point  after  point  was  turned,  and  Godwin's  Sands — where  was 
buried  the  fat  demesne  of  old  Duke  Godwin,  the  father  of 
Harold — were  left  on  the  right.  We  entered  the  Thames; 
passed  smiling  villages,  attractive  seats  and  a  neat  country  on 
the  banks  and  thousands  of  vessels  floating  on  the  river.  For 

46 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  47 

eighty  miles  there  was  a  continuous  stream  of  vessels;  and  as 
we  gradually  approached  the  city  then  did  the  magnitude  and 
mightiness  of  this  place  become  evident.  For  five  miles  on 
either  side  the  banks  were  literally  lined  with  ships,  their  black 
hulls  in  gloomy  array,  and  their  masts  in  lengthening  forests. 
We  were  landed  at  London  Bridge,  and  my  eyes  recognized  at 
once  w  London's  column  pointing  to  the  skies/  and,  as  I  drove 
up  to  lodgings,  St.  Paul's.  When  I  landed  I  first  supposed 
myself  in  the  centre  of  the  city;  but  I  subsequently  found  that 
I  had  hardly  reached  this  point,  when,  driving  two  miles,  I 
was  set  down  at  Tavistock  Hotel,  in  Covent  Garden." 

He  engaged  permanent  lodgings  near  Parliament  and  the 
Courts.  He  brought  letters  of  introduction  from  Judge  Story, 
Emerson  and  others  to  Justice  Vaughan,  Carlyle,  Wordsworth, 
Lords  Jeffrey,  Denman  and  Fitzwilliam  and  two  or  three 
other  persons  of  less  note.  He  presented  some  of  these  letters 
promptly  upon  his  arrival  in  London.  Of  four  clubs  the  Alfred, 
Garrick,  Athenaeum  and  Travellers,  he  was  shortly  after  elected 
an  honorary  member.  This  was  a  qualified  membership,  en 
titling  him  during  his  temporary  residence  to  the  privileges  of 
the  club. 

Here  he  mostly  took  his  meals  and  wrote  many  letters.  He 
was  enabled  by  the  persons  to  whom  he  bore  letters  to  make 
friends  besides  those  he  met  at  the  clubs,  until  with  the  broad 
ening  circle,  before  his  departure,  he  numbered  among  his  ac 
quaintances  most  of  the  great  names  of  the  England  of  that 
day.  It  must  always  be  remembered  that  he  bore  letters  to 
only  a  few  of  those  he  met.  His  letters  hardly  numbered  more 
than  a  dozen ;  while  he  counted  his  friends  by  hundreds.  The 
letters  could  have  laid  those  to  whom  they  were  addressed  un 
der  only  the  most  moderate  obligations  to  him,  an  invitation 
to  dine  or  some  similar  courtesy  and  then  the  acquaintance 
need  have  been  pursued  no  farther.  But  as  shown  by  his  let 
ters  Sumner's  invitations  to  dine  were  more  than  he  could 
accept.  If  he  had  not  himself  attracted  the  persons  he  met, 
his  circle  would  have  been  narrow,  for  he  scrupulously  re 
frained  from  asking  for  any  introductions  at  all.  But  it  is 
some  tribute  to  his  own  personality  that  when  he  returned  to 
the  Continent  he  was  told  by  those  amply  able  to  judge  that 
he  "  had  seen  more  of  England  and  its  society  not  only  than 
any  foreigner  but  even  than  a  native."  So  great  an  authority 
as  Lord  Denman,  then  Chief  Justice  of  England,  wrote  him 
on  leaving :  "  No  one  ever  conciliated  more  universal  respect 
and  good  will." 

Sumner's  earliest  acquaintances  jn  London  were  among  the 


48  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  RUMNER 

members  of  the  bar.  Pleasant  glimpses  we  get  of  him  as  he 
describes  his  visits  to  Parliament.  First  in  the  company  of  a 
little  knot  of  barristers,  he  dropped  into  the  House  of  Com 
mons  one  evening  about  ten  o'clock  and  found  that  body  en 
gaged  in  the  dull  discharge  of  routine  business, — so  dull  that, 
in  humorous  amazement  he  records  that  he  actually  dropped 
asleep  under  its  Gallery.  But  he  quickly  corrects  the  impres 
sion  this  might  give  of  his  interest  in  that  body,  by  relating  his 
next  experience,  when,  through  the  courtesy  of  one  of  its  mem 
bers,  he  was  admitted  to  the  floor  of  the  House  and  with  this 
advantage  sat  through  a  night's  debate  on  the  Irish  Municipal 
Corporation  Bill. 

He  thoughtfully  estimated  the  successive  speakers.  There 
was  the  polished,  graceful,  self-possessed,  candid,  or  apparently 
candid,  Peel,  with  rather  a  want  of  power;  and  the  diminu 
tive,  rickety  Lord  John  Russell,  wriggling  around,  playing  with 
his  hat,  seemingly  unable  to  dispose  of  his  hands  or  his  feet, 
his  voice  small  and  thin,  but  notwithstanding  all  this  a  house 
of  upwards  of  five  hundred  members,  hushed  to  catch  his 
slightest  accents.  You  listened  and  you  felt  that  you  heard  a 
man  of  mind,  of  thought  and  of  moral  elevation.  Then  came 
Sheil,  breaking  forth  with  one  of  his  splendid  bursts,  full  of 
animation  in  the  extreme,  in  gesture  and  glow  like  Sturgis,  in 
voice  like  John  Randolph,  screaming  and  talking  in  octaves 
and  yet  the  House  listening  and  cheering.  Sugden,  the  author 
of  the  "  Law  of  Vendors  ",  authority  wherever,  the  world  over, 
the  Common  Law  finds  a  home,  tried  to  speak,  but  his  voice  for 
the  whole  half  hour  he  was  on  the  floor  was  drowned  by  calls 
for  the  question  and  the  uproar  of  the  members  and  the  Gal 
lery,  so  that  Sumner  heard  not  a  word  he  uttered.  Then  the 
accomplished  O'Connell,  with  his  rich  voice,  more  copious  and 
powerful  than  Clay's,  charmed  the  House  to  silence.  Campbell, 
afterwards  Lord  Chief  Justice  was  there.  And  Follett  spoke, 
already  Sumner's  friend,  and  the  leader  of  the  English  bar, 
Sumner  thought,  better  than  all  the  rest.  Was  it  partiality  for 
his  friend  or  his  profession  that  made  him  think  so  ?  Sumner 
was  attached  to  both. 

He  was  impressed  with  what  he  saw  of  the  English  bar.  He 
was  introduced  by  the  Chief  Justice,  Lord  Denman,  to  whom 
he  brought  a  letter  of  introduction.  He  was  at  once  received 
among  them  upon  friendly  terms  and  was  impressed  with  what 
seemed  to  him  the  unusual  freedom  of  their  intercourse,  never 
addressing  one  another  with  the  prefix  "  Mr."  but  always  sim 
ply,  "  Follett ",  "  Campbell  ",  "  Wilde  ",  dining  together  at  the 
Inns  of  Court,  many  of  them  lodging  there,  frequenting  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  49 

clubs  together  and  travelling  in  company  on  the  Circuit.  They 
appeared  to  Sumner  like  a  well-regulated  family,  a  band  of 
brothers.  It  was  to  them  that  he  owed  his  admission  to  the 
clubs.  Lodging  among  them,  a  well-read  lawyer  himself,  well 
educated,  accustomed  to  good  society  and  its  amenities,  eager 
to  learn  of  their  courts  and  to  know  those  who  presided  and 
practised  there  and  able  to  impart  a  similar  knowledge  of  our 
own  courts,  with  his  youth  and  versatility  he  easily  became 
an  accession  to  their  society.  He  thus  found  opportunity  to 
see  them  in  public  and  in  private.  He  knew  most  of  the  Judges 
and  was  invited  to  dine  with  them  and  repeatedly,  during 
trials,  occupied,  by  their  invitations,  a  seat  at  their  side  on  the 
bench.  The  relations  of  the  bench  and  the  bar  were  more 
cordial  than  he  had  been  accustomed  to  see.  Each  seemed 
more  the  helper  of  the  other.  Good-will,  graciousness  and 
kindness  prevailed  between  them.  To  him,  as  he  wrote,  noth 
ing  could  be  imagined  more  pleasant  than  the  life  of  an  Eng 
lish  Judge,  with  the  English  bar  always  standing  between  him 
and  the  litigants  to  soften  the  asperities  of  his  position. 

The  practice  of  the  law  had  its  humorous  side.  Straying  into 
the  committee  room  of  the  House  of  Lords  one  morning,  Sum 
ner  found  several  attorneys  busy  examining  witnesses  as  to  the 
feasibility  of  a  proposed  railroad.  He  at  once  recognized  Sir 
Charles  Witherell  by  the  careless  and  slovenly  dress,  by  which 
he  had  repeatedly  heard  him  described.  The  witness  was  a 
plain  farmer  also  apparently  careless  of  his  appearance.  The 
question  was  asked,  by  Sir  Charles,  whether  the  proposed 
road  would  not  do  considerable  business  in  carrying  articles  of 
fashion.  "  Well,  as  to  articles  of  fashion,  Sir  Charles,  I  do  not 
think  they  much  concern  either  you  or  me,"  was  the  quick  re 
sponse.  The  committee  laughed  heartily  and  Sir  Charles  joined 
them. 

To  Judge  Story  he  wrote  of  the  courts  and  judges  and  of  the 
bar.  "  Most  of  the  judges  go  to  court  in  the  morning  on  horse 
back,  with  a  groom  on  another  horse  behind;  and  they  are 
notorious  as  being  very  poor  riders — though  the  fate  of  Twys- 
den  has  been  latterly  unknown,  he  having  fallen  from  his  horse 
on  the  route  and  then  declared  that  no  Lord  Chancellor  should 
ever  make  him  mount  again.  In  winter  the  court  opens  at  ten 
o'clock;  and  they  continue  sitting  till  between  four  and  five, — 
often  till  seven.  Between  one  and  two  they  leave  the  bench  and 
retire  to  their  room,  where  they  eat  a  sandwich  and  drink  a 
glass  of  wine  from  a  phial ;  this  takes  five  or  ten  minutes  only. 
The 'judges  have  not  separate  seats,  as  with  us;  but  all  sit  on 
one  long  red-cushioned  seat, — which  may  with  propriety  be 


50  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

called  the  bench,  in  contradistinction  to  the  chair,  which  is  the 
seat  of  a  professor.  I  shall  begin  with  the  common  law,  and, 
of  course,  with  the  Queen's  Bench." 

"  You  know  Lord  Denman,  Chief  Justice  of  the  Queen's 
Bench,  intellectually  better  than  I;  but  you  do  not  know  his 
person,  his  voice,  his  manner,  his  tone, — all  every  inch  the 
judge.  He  sits  the  admired  impersonation  of  the  law.  He  is 
tall  and  well  made  with  a  justice-like  countenance :  his  voice 
and  the  gravity  of  his  manner,  and  the  generous  feeling  with 
which  he  castigates  everything  departing  from  the  strictest  line 
of  right  conduct,  remind  me  of  Greenleaf  more  than  any  other 
man  I  have  ever  known.  I  wish  you  could  have  listened  to 
Lord  D.,  as  I  did  on  the  circuit,  when  he  sentenced  some  of 
the  vicious  and  profligate  wretches  brought  before  him.  His 
noble  indignation  at  crime  showed  itself  so  naturally  and 
simply  that  all  our  bosoms  were  warmed  by  it ;  and  I  think  his 
words  must  have  gone  like  iron  into  even  the  stony  hearts  of 
the  prisoners.  And  yet  I  have  seen  this  constitutional  warmth 
find  vent  on  occasions  when  it  should  have  been  restrained;  it 
was  directed  against  the  Attorney-General,  who  was  pressing 
for  delay  in  a  certain  matter  with  a  pertinacity  rather  peculiar 
to  him.  Lord  D.  has  to  a  remarkable  degree,  the  respect  of 
the  bar;  though  they  very  generally  agree  that  he  is  quite  an 
ordinary  lawyer.  He  is  honest  as  the  stars,  and  is  willing  to 
be  guided  by  the  superior  legal  learning  of  Patterson.  In  con 
versation,  he  is  gentle  and  bland;  I  have  never  seen  him  ex 
cited.  His  son,  who  will  be  the  future  Lord  Denman,  is  what 
is  here  called  a  nice  person." 

"  Littledale  is  rather  advanced  in  life ;  I  should  call  him 
seventy.  He  has  the  reputation  of  great  book-learning ;  but  he 
seems  deficient  in  readiness  or  force,  both  on  the  bench  and  in 
society.  I  heard  old  Justice  Allen  Park  say  that  Littledale 
could  never  get  a  conviction  in  a  case  where  there  was  any  ap 
peal  to  the  feelings.  He  has  not  sat  in  bane  this  term,  but  has 
held  the  Bail  Court." 

"  Patterson  is  the  ablest  lawyer  on  the  Queen's  Bench, — some 
say  the  first  in  all  the  courts.  As  I  have  already  written  you, 
he  is  unfortunately  deaf,  to  such  a  degree  as  to  impair  his  use 
fulness,  though  by  no  means  to  prevent  his  participating  in  the 
labors  of  the  bench.  He  is  deeply  read  and  has  his  learning  at 
command.  His  language  is  not  smooth  and  easy,  either  in 
conversation  or  on  the  bench ;  but  it  is  always  significant,  and  to 
the  purpose.  In  person  he  is  rather  short  and  stout,  and  with 
a  countenance  that  seems  to  me  heavy  and  gross ;  though  I  find 
that  many  of  the  bar  think  it  quite  otherwise.  I  heard  Warren 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  '51 

— author  of  '  Ten  Thousand  a  Year '  and  '  Law  Studies  ' — 
say  that  it  was  one  of  the  loveliest  faces  he  ever  looked  upon; 
perhaps  he  saw  and  admired  the  man  in  his  countenance.  I 
have  heard  many  express  themselves  about  him  with  the  greatest 
fondness.  He  has  a  very  handsome  daughter." 

"  Turn  next  to  the  Common  Pleas.  There  is,  first,  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Tindal.  He  sits  over  his  desk  in  court,  taking 
notes  constantly, — occasionally  interposing  a  question,  but  in 
the  most  quiet  manner.  His  eyes  are  large  and  rolling;  in 
stature  he  ih  rather  short.  His  learning,  patience  and  fidelity 
are  of  the  highest  order.  He  is  one  of  the  few  judges  who 
study  their  causes  on  their  return  home.  His  manner  is  sin 
gularly  bland  and  gentle,  and  is,  perhaps,  deficient  in  decision 
and  occasional  sternness.  Sergeant  Wilde  is  said  to  exercise  a 
very  great  influence  over  him ;  indeed  scandal  attributes  to  him 
some  of  the  <  power  behind  the  throne  greater  than  the  throne '. 
Upon  Tindal  devolves  the  decision  of  all  interlocutory  matters 
in  his  court,  the  other  judges  seldom  interposing  with  regard 
to  them,  or,  indeed,  appearing  to  interest  themselves  about 
them.  He  is  one  of  the  kindest  men  that  ever  lived. 

"  Then  comes  Yaughan.  He  became  a  sergeant  sometime  in 
the  last  century  and  was  the  youngest  ever  known.  At  one 
period  his  practice  was  greater,  perhaps,  than  of  anybody 
ever  known  in  the  courts.  His  income  was  some  fifteen  thou 
sand  pounds.  About  1820  his  leg  was  broken  very  badly  by  a 
cartman,  who  ran  against  him  as  he  was  driving  in  a  gig.  After 
being  confined  to  his  bed  for  three  months,  he  at  length  ap- 

nred  in  court  on  the  shoulders  of  his  servants;  and  had  a 
e  cut  in  the  desk  before  him  for  his  leg ;  and  by  permission 
of  the  court  addressed  the  jury  sitting.  His  business  at  once 
returned  to  him.  In  1820,  he  was  made  a  judge,  it  is  said  at 
the  bar,  by  the  direct  command  of  George  IV,  who  was  moved 
to  it  by  his  favorite  physician,  Sir  Henry  Halford ;  which  gave 
occasion  to  the  saying  in  the  bar  benches  that  '  Vaughan  was 
made  a  judge  by  prescription'.  He  is  reputed  to  have  the 
smallest  possible  allowance  of  law  for  a  judge ;  but  he  abounds 
in  native  strength  and  sagacity,  and  in  freedom  of  language. 
With  him  the  labors  of  the  judge  cease  the  moment  he  quits 
the  bench.  I  doubt  if  he  ever  looks  into  a  cause  at  chambers. 
In  his  study  he  once  showed  me  four  guns,  and  told  me  with 
great  glee  that,  by  sending  a  note  to  Sergeant  Wilde,  he  per 
suaded  him  not  to  make  any  motion  on  a  certain  day,  and  got 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  adjourned  at  twelve  o'clock;  he  at 
once  went  fifteen  miles  into  the  country,  and  before  four  o'clock 
had  shot  a  brace  of  pheasants,  the  learned  judge  sitting  on 


52  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

horseback  when  he  fired,  as  from  his  lameness  he  was  unable 
to  walk.  He  is  fond  of  Shakespeare  arid  often  have  we  inter 
changed  notes  during  a  long  argument  of  Follett  or  Wilde, 
while  I  was  sitting  by  the  side  of  the  latter  in  the  Sergeants' 
row,  the  burden  of  which  has  been  some  turn  or  expression 
from  the  great  bard,  the  crowd  supposing  he  was  actively  tak 
ing  minutes  of  the  argument,  while  he  was  inditing  some 
thing  pleasant  for  me  to  which  I  never  failed  to  reply.  His 
present  wife  when  young  was  eminently  beautiful,  so  that  Sir 
Thomas  Lawrence  used  her  portrait  in  some  imaginary  pieces. 
He  has  several  children,  one  of  whom,  his  eldest  son,  graduated 
at  the  University  with  distinguished  honor,  and  has  been 
recently  called  to  the  bar:  I  think  him  a  young  man  full  of 
promise.  Vaughan  though  not  a  man  of  book-learning  himself 
respects  it  in  others/' 

Sumner  thus  describes  the  trial  of  a  case  before  the  House 
of  Lords :  "  I  have  not  spoken  of  arguments  before  the  Lords. 
I  have  attended  one  and  sat  in  conversation  with  the  Attorney- 
General,  Lushington,  and  Clark,  the  reporter.  The  Chancellor 
sat  at  the  table  below  the  woolsack;  the  benches  of  the  Lords 
were  bare ;  only  two  unfortunate  members,  to  whom  by  rotation 
it  belonged  to  tend-out  in  this  manner,  were  present  in  order 
to  constitute  the  quorum.  These  happened  to  be,  as  Dr.  Lush 
ington  explained  to  me,  Lord  Sudely,  who  is  quite  skilled  in 
architecture,  and  Lord  Mostyn,  who  is  a  great  fox-hunter. 
There  they  sat  from  ten  o'clock  in  the  morning  till  four  in  the 
afternoon,  with  their  legs  stretched  on  the  red  benches  and 
endeavoring  by  all  possible  changes  of  posture  to  wear  away  the 
time.  The  Attorney-General  told  me  that  '  it  would  be  thought 
quite  indecorous  in  either  of  them  to  interfere  by  saying  a 
word '.  You  have  asked  about  the  character  of  the  judges,  I 
should  not  omit  that  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  (Cottenham).  He 
did  not  once  open  his  lips,  I  think,  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  hearing.  I  am  astonished  at  the  concurrent  expres 
sions  of  praise  which  I  hear  from  every  quarter.  He  has  been 
all  his  days  a  devoted  student  of  the  law;  and  I  believe  of 
nothing  else." 

Perhaps  it  was  after  a  day  before  this  court,  and  having  in 
mind  such  judges  as  Lord  Sudely  and  Lord  Mostyn,  that  an 
eminent  English  barrister  once  told  Sumner  that  he  always 
drank  porter  before  an  argument  in  order  to  bring  his  under 
standing  down  to  a  level  with  the  judges. 

Sumner  breakfasted  with  Lord  Chief  Justice  Denman,  whose 
invitations  to -dinner,  owing  to  other  engagements,  he  was 
obliged  to  decline.  He  dined  with  Lord  Wharncliffe.  He  at- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  53 

tended  a  great  ball  at  Lord  Fitzwilliam's,  starting  from  his 
lodgings  at  eleven  o'clock  in  the  evening,  but  the  press  of  car 
riages  was  so  great  there,  that  he  did  not  reach  the  door  until 
one.  There  was  the  elite  of  England's  nobility.  He  remarked 
that  the  only  untitled  name  he  heard  was  that  of  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  who  bore  the  rather  suggestive  one,  Spring 
Rice.  It  seemed  as  if  he  had  fallen  in  fairyland,  with  the 
v/hirl  of  beautiful  women  and  well-dressed  men  about  him, 
Lord  and  Lady,  waiting  as  submissively  as  himself  to  be  pre 
sented.  He  attended  a  collation  by  the  Bishop  of  London  and 
was  asked  by  the  Bishop  to  take  wine  with  him.  He  was  in 
vited  to  the  banquet  of  the  Lord  Mayor  of  London  and  his 
health  was  proposed  by  the  late  Lord  Mayor,  in  a  compli 
mentary  speech,  to  which  he  made  an  impromptu  reply,  draw 
ing  cheers  from  his  audience  and  afterwards  congratulations 
from  his  friends.  He  attended  the  coronation  of  Queen 
Victoria,  with  its  gorgeousness  and  suggestions  of  feudal  glory 
and  was  at  a  grand  fete  given  in  honor  of  the  event  at  Lans- 
downe  House. 

The  invitations  to  these  places  were  all  voluntary.  Sumner 
as  scrupulously  refrained  from  asking  for  them  as  he  had  for 
introductions. 

The  numerous  invitations  he  received  enabled  him  to  meet 
and,  in  many  instances,  to  know  well  men  of  wider  reputation 
than  most  of  those  who  bore  the  English  titles.  His  letters, 
especially  to  Hillard,  abound  in  descriptions  of  the  literary 
people  he  saw.  It  was  in  the  great  names  of  English  Literature, 
whose  writings  they  had  discussed  at  the  meetings  of  the  Five 
of  Clubs  and  in  their  private  walks  and  talks  that  Hillard  was 
most  interested.  He  wanted  to  hear  from  Sumner  how  these 
men  looked  and  talked  and  acted,  his  estimate  of  them  from  a 
close  point  of  view.  The  glimpses  Sumner  gives  us  of  them 
are  delightful;  Bulwer,  radiant  with  jewellery  and  incased  in 
ruffles,  with  his  high-heeled  boots,  and  flaming  blue  cravat, 
strutting  about  the  club ;  Pool,  the  author  of  "  Paul  Pry  ",  sit 
ting  very  quietly,  eating  moderately,  using  few  but  choice 
words,  often  hitting  off  clever  things ;  Lockhart,  the  son-in-law 
and  biographer  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  fretting  about,  saying  lit 
tle  and  still  less  that  was  worth  remembering.  He  saw  the 
banker-poet  Rogers,  often  in  company,  but  never  liked  him  till 
he  breakfasted  with  him  at  his  own  home.  Then  he  found  him, 
as  a  converser,  unique,  the  world  not  giving  him  credit  enough 
for  his  great  and  peculiar  power,  in  this  line;  terse,  epigram 
matic,  dry,  infinitely  to  the  point,  full  of  wisdom,  sarcasm  and 
cold  humor,  saying  the  most  ill-natured  things  and  doing  the 


54  LWE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

\ 

best;  to  be  alone  with  him,  enjoying  his  paintings  and  rare 
art  treasures,  and  still  more  his  frank  talk  of  the  society  and 
poets  and  poetry  of  the  quarter  of  a  century  that  had  passed 
before  him,  he  alone  of  all  unchanged, — "  seldom  ",  he  adds, 
"  have  I  enjoyed  myself  more  ". 

Here  is  his  first  glimpse  of  Macaulay,  the  historian,  whom  he 
afterwards  met  frequently :  "  During  the  dinner  at  Lord  Lans- 
downe's,  I  was  addressed  across  the  table,  which  was  a  large 
round  one,  by  a  gentleman  with  black  hair  and  round  face, 
with  regard  to  the  United  States.  The  question  was  put,  with 
distinctness  and  precision,  and  in  a  voice  a  little  sharp  and 
above  the  ordinary  key.  I  did  not  know  the  name  of  the  gentle 
man  for  some  time,  till  by  and  by,  I  heard  him  addressed  by 
some  one,  as  '  Macaulay '.  I  at  once  asked  Lord  Shelburne,  who 
sat  on  my  right,  if  that  was  Thomas  Babington  Macaulay,  just 
returned  from  India,  and  was  told  that  it  was.  At  the  table 
we  had  considerable  conversation,  and  on  passing  into  the  draw 
ing-room  it  was  renewed.  He  is  now  nearly  or  about  forty, 
rather  short,  and  with  a  belly  of  unclassical  proportions.  His 
conversation  was  rapid,  brilliant  and  powerful ;  by  far  the  best 
of  any  in  the  company,  though  Mr.  Senior  was  there  and 
several  others  of  no  mean  powers.  I  expect  other  opportunities 
of  meeting  him.  He  says  that  he  shall  abandon  politics,  not 
enter  Parliament,  and  addict  himself  entirely  to  literature." 

Sumner  carried  a  letter  from  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson  to 
Thomas  Carlyle.  He  wrote  to  Hillard :  "  I  heard  Carlyle  lec 
ture  the  other  day ;  he  seemed  like  an  inspired  boy ;  truths  and 
thoughts  that  made  one  move  on  the  benches  came  from  his 
apparently  unconscious  mind,  couched  in  the  most  grotesque 
style,  and  yet  condensed  to  a  degree  of  intensity,  if  I  may  so 
write.  He  is  the  Zerah  Colburn  of  thought;  childlike  in  man 
ner  and  feeling,  and  yet  reaching  by  intuition,  points  and 
extremes  of  ratiocination  which  others  could  not  so  well  ac 
complish  after  days  of  labor,  if  indeed  they  ever  could.  I  have 
received  a  very  kind  note  inviting  me  to  pass  an  evening  with 
him,  but  another  engagement  prevented  my  accepting." 

Later,  he  wrote :  "  Another  morning  was  devoted  to  Carlyle. 
His  manners  and  his  conversation  are  as  unformed  as  his  style 
and  yet,  withal,  equally  full  of  genius.  In  conversation  he 
piles  up  thought  upon  thought,  and  imagining  upon  imagin 
ing,  till  the  erection  seems  about  to  topple  down  with  its  weight. 
He  lives  in  great  retirement,  I  fear  almost  in  poverty.  To  him 
London  and  its  mighty  maze  of  society  are  nothing;  neither 
he  nor  his  writings  are  known.  Carlyle  said  the  strangest  thing 
in  the  history  of  literature  was  his  receipt  of  fifty  pounds  from 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  55 

'America,  on  account  of  his  '  French  Revolution 9  which  had 
never  yielded  him  a  farthing  in  Europe  and  probably  never 
would.'  I  am  to  meet  Leigh  Hunt  at  Carlyle's." 

fe  I  have  often/7  he  wrote,  "  met  Hallam,  the  historian,  at  the 
Athenaeum.  I  was  standing  the  other  day  by  the  side  of  a 
pillar,  so  that  I  was  not  observed  by  him,  when  he  first  met 
Phillips,  the  barrister  who  visited  America  during  the  last 
summer;  and  he  cried  out,  extending  his  hand  at  the  same 
time :  '  Well,  you  are  not  tattooed  really ! '  Hallam  is  a  plain, 
frank  man,  but  is  said  to  be  occasionally  quite  testy  and  rest 
less.  Charles  Babbage,  himself  one  of  the  most  petulant  men 
that  ever  lived,  told  me  that  Hallam  once  lay  awake  all  night 
till  four  o'clock  in  the  morning,  hearing  the  chimes  and  the 
watchman's  hourly  annunciation  of  them.  When  he  heard  the 
cry,  i  Four  o'clock  and  a  cloudy  morning ?,  he  leaped  from  his 
bed,  threw  open  his  window,  and,  hailing  the  terrified  watch 
man,  cried  out :  ( It  is  not  four  o'clock ;  it  wants  five  minutes 
of  it ! '  and  after  this  volley  at  once  fell  asleep." 

Again :  "  A  few  evenings  ago  I  dined  with  Hallam.  He  is  a 
person  of  plain  manners,  rather  robust,  and  wears  a  steel  watch- 
guard  over  his  waistcoat.  He  is  neither  fluent  nor  brilliant  in 
conversation;  but  is  sensible,  frank  and  unaffected.  After 
dinner  we  discussed  the  merits  of  the  different  British  histo 
rians,  Gibbon,  Hume  and  Robertson.  Of  course  Gibbon  was 
placed  foremost." 

"  Said  Barry  Cornwall  to  me  yesterday  while  he  held  in  his 
hand  a  lovely  little  boy :  '  Have  you  any  such  beautiful  pictures 
as  this  ? '  What  fine  sentiment  comes  from  married  folks ! 
And,  indeed,  a  lovely  child  is  a  beautiful  picture.  I  loved  the 
poet  more  after  he  had  put  me  that  close  question.  His  gentle 
countenance,  which  seemed  all  unequal  to  the  energy  which 
dictated  '  The  sea !  The  sea ! '  was  filled  with  joyous  satisfac 
tion  and  love ;  and  he  hugged  the  boy  to  his  bosom." 

And  so  these  charming  sketches  run  on ;  many  of  them  show 
the  good  heart  of  Sumner,  revealed  in  the  comment  he  makes 
upon  what  he  saw.  They  all  show  a  tender  regard  for  his 
friends.  He  was  enjoying  England  himself,  but  he  was  care 
ful  by  long  and  almost  daily  letters  to  share  the  pleasures  and 
profits  of  his  trip  with  those  who  had  sympathized  with  his 
ambition  to  see  these  countries  or  had  aided  him  to  it  in  a  more 
substantial  way.  Judge  Story,  his  ever  faithful  friend  and 
mentor  and  his  excellent  wife,  both  loving  him  hardly  less  than 
their  own  son,  Professor  and  Mrs.  Greenleaf,  scarcely  behind 
them  in  affectionate  regard,  Hillard  and  Longfellow  and 
Lieber,  his  early  and  constant  friends,  as  well  as  the  members 


56  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

of  his  own  family,  all  had  abundant  proof  of  this  kind  of  his 
unchanging  affection  for  them. 

His  letters  from  England  alone,  that  have  been  preserved, 
cover  about  one  hundred  and  forty  closely  printed  octavo  pages. 
And  some  others  that  are  known  to  have  been  written  have  not 
been  found.  They  were  all  written,  in  the  abandon  of  friend 
ship,  with  the  freshness  and  enthusiasm  of  youth,  and  with  no 
view  to  publication.  He  never  reclaimed  any  of  them  and  his 
only  care  seemed  to  be  lest  they  should  fall  into  unfriendly 
hands  and  the  freedom  with  which  they  were  written  should 
be  abused.  Those  who  received  them  handed  them  to  others 
and  by  this  means  they  were  read  by  a  wide  circle  of  friends. 

While  in  London  he  was  useful  to  some  of  his  friends  in 
other  ways.  Francis  Lieber  had  just  completed  his  "  Political 
Ethics  "  and  was  desirous  of  having  it  published  in  England. 
Sumner  undertook  to  accomplish  this  for  him  and  succeeded  in 
making  a  satisfactory  arrangement.  He  also  volunteered  to 
distribute  copies  of  it  to  influential  friends  of  his  own  and 
to  have  it  reviewed  in  some  of  the  leading  periodicals.  He  pro 
cured  a  publisher  for  Judge  Story's  "  Equity  Pleadings  "  and 
had  Prescott's  "  Ferdinand  and  Isabella ",  then  just  issued, 
reviewed  and  sought  in  other  ways  to  gain  for  it  a 
favorable  reception  in  England  and  Scotland.  All  these  serv 
ices  were  gratefully  acknowledged ;  and  his  efforts  for  a  recogni 
tion  of  Prescott,  whom  he  had  not  known  before,  was  the  com 
mencement  of  a  lasting  friendship. 

His  letters  abound  in  evidence  of  his  interest  in  affairs  at 
home.  In  his  quiet  hours  there  often  passed  over  him  thoughts 
of  his  deserted  law  office  and  of  the  trains  of  business  cut  short 
which  seemed  a  little  while  before  to  be  bearing  him  on  to  fame 
and  fortune.  He  wrote  of  Dane  Hall  and  the  Law  School,  the 
hardly  confessed  hope  of  his  future,  of  the  pretty  firesides  in 
Cambridge,  where  he  had  always  found  a  welcome  seat,  where 
rare  intelligence  presided  and  "  the  merry  laugh  went  round  ". 
Whatever  interested  these  friends  interested  him, — far  away, — 
their  marriages,  the  births  of  their  children  or  the  death  of  one 
of  them.  How  he  sorrowed  with  them!  Hillard's  only  child 
had  died,  a  little  boy,  two  years  old.  The  news  reached  Sumner 
a  month  later  after  an  all-night's  ride  from  Holkham  to  Lon 
don.  He  could  not  rest  till  he  had  written.  The  joyous  letters 
he  had  sent  to  him,  all  unconscious  of  his  sorrow,  how  they 
would  seem  to  flout  his  grief.  He  tenderly  sought  to  smooth 
away  the  sorrow  of  the  parents,  with  thoughts  of  the  society 
there  would  be  to  them,  of  the  richest  kind,  in  the  cherished 
image  of  the  dear  one  whose  body  had  been  taken  away,  his  own 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  57 

pure  spirit  mingling  with  the  goodness  and  greatness  that  had 
gone  before,  he  escaping  the  toils  and  trials,  which  would,  per 
haps,  if  he  had  lived  to  encounter  them,  have  made  him  mourn 
that  he  was  born ;  and  he  reminded  them  of  the  gratitude  they 
owed  to  God  for  casting  such  a  sunbeam  across  their  path  even 
though  followed  by  the  darkness  of  their  present  sorrow. 

Why  should  Sumner's  friends  not  love  him,  with  all  his  kind 
ness  and  consideration  for  them?  Their  letters  to  him  were 
full  of  congratulations  upon  the  success  he  was  everywhere 
meeting.  They  felt  themselves  honored  in  the  representative 
they  had  abroad  and  they  wrote  him  to  go  on  and  see  every 
thing  he  could  and  then  come  home  and  in  the  quiet  walks  of 
his  former  days,  tell  them  all  about  his  journey.  They  planned 
his  future  for  him,  in  the  office  and  in  the  school,  both  he  and 
they  little  thinking  how  different  it  would  be.  Underneath  all 
the  hope  expressed,  there  was  a  lurking  fear  that  he  might  be 
spoiled,  by  all  this  novelty  and  excitement,  for  the  practical, 
work-a-day  life  of  home.  But  he  went  on  following  the  present 
with  all  his  ardor,  delving  into  the  rich  mines  of  English  life 
and  story,  content  to  take  care  of  the  future  when  it  came. 

He  had  invitations  from  the  judges  to  attend  them  upon  all 
the  circuits.  The  social  season  of  London  was  closing,  the 
people  of  wealth  and  position  from  all  parts  of  the  kingdom, 
who  habitually  come  there  during  the  winter  months,  to  enjoy 
some  recreation  away  from  their  estates,  amid  the  gayeties  of 
the  metropolis,  were  departing.  A  number  of  them  invited 
Sumner  to  visit  their  country  seats.  With  Parliament  and  the 
courts  closed,  the  theatres  empty,  the  clubs  deserted,  his  friends 
gone  and  the  hot  season  of  the  year  at  hand,  the  city  could  have 
few  attractions,  while  the  country  with  its  pure  air,  with  per 
sons  and  places  full  of  interest  easily  drew  him  away. 

He  left  London  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  July,  1838,  and 
remained  away  till  the  fourth  day  of  November  following.  The 
intervening  months  were  as  industriously  employed  as  any 
since  he  had  left  home.  His  route  lay  westward  into  Corn 
wall,  thence  North,  through  the  western  counties,  into  Scot 
land,  spending  three  weeks  there  and  a  week  in  Ireland,  and 
returning  to  London  from  the  North  through  the  eastern 
counties.  On  the  way  he  was  introduced  to  many  people  of 
eminence  and  was  entertained  at  some  of  the  most  considerable 
houses  of  the  kingdom. 

The  season  of  the  year  was  the  best  that  could  be  chosen  for 
this  trip.  As  he  started  away,  the  trees  were  in  full  leaf,  the 
meadows  and  cultivated  gardens  were  green  and  fields,  whiten 
ing  for  the  harvest,  were  nodding  in  the  sunshine.  The  journey 


58  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

was  performed  mostly  by  coach  and  private  conveyance,  over 
excellent  roads.  The  varying  landscape  he  passed  was  beauti 
ful.  The  occasional  ruggedness  of  the  scenery,  everywhere 
softened  by  centuries  of  the  civilizing  work  of  man,  the  fertile 
farms  and  broad  estates,  never  monotonous,  seldom  mounting 
to  the  ruggedness  of  a  hill  or  mountain,  but  rolling  quietly 
away;  the  busy  marts  of  trade  and  manufactures,  interspersed 
between  with  neat  country  villages ;  grim,  castled  halls  frown 
ing  from  some  eminence;  pretty  cottages,  with  prirn  little 
gardens  hedged  in,  and  well  kept  out-buildings,  peeping  out  of 
every  shaded  dell;  still  flowing  rivers  winding  through  quiet 
fields,  and  around  all  the  white-capped  waves  of  the  ocean,  dash 
ing  themselves  against  a  rugged  and  rocky  coast,  altogether 
made  one  of  the  most  beautiful  pictures  that  the  human  eye 
could  witness. 

Sumner  went  first  to  Guildford  where  he  met  the  Home  Cir 
cuit  and  dined  with  Lord  Denman  and  the  bar,  then  to  Win 
chester  and  Salisbury,  stopping  at  the  latter  place  to  see  the 
cathedral.  He  visited  Old  Sarum  and  Stonehenge,  peculiar 
relics  of  antiquity,  supposed  to  be  remains  of  an  ancient  temple 
and  altar  of  the  Druids.  Thence  he  went  to  Exeter  and  then 
to  Bodmin,  where  he  met  the  Western  Circuit.  At  Bodmin  he 
found  Follett  and  Wilde,  two  leaders  of  the  London  bar,  there 
on  business.  Together  with  Sumner  they  were  the  guests  of 
the  bar,  at  a  banquet  where  his  health  was  proposed  and  he 
made  an  impromptu  response.  He  saw  much  of  these  two 
men  in  England  and  was  entertained  by  both  of  them.  They 
deserve  more  than  a  passing  notice. 

William  Webb  Follett  was  then  only  forty  years  of  age, 
youthful  in  appearance  and  manner,  and  a  most  lovable  person. 
As  a  speaker  he  was  flueDt,  graceful  and  distinct  with  an 
agreeable  voice ;  uniformly  bland,  courteous  and  conversational 
in  style.  He  seemed  to  have  a  genius  for  the  law ;  in  stating  a 
legal  proposition  or  arguing  a  case  he  was  at  home.  Yet,  as 
was  unusual,  he  was  equally  successful  in  that  very  different 
kind  of  oratory,  parliamentary  eloquence.  Calls  for  him  were 
frequent  upon  the  floor  of  the  House  and  he  was  listened  to 
with  marked  attention.  He  had  carefully  mastered  the  ele 
ments  of  the  law,  but  his  knowledge  of  other  subjects,  politics 
as  well,  seemed  to  be  superficial.  His  practice  at  this  time  was 
large;  Sumner  thought  he  had  an  annual  income  of  fifteen 
thousand  pounds  and  it  was  generally  allowed  that  he  would  be 
made  Lord  Chancellor  upon  the  accession  of  his  party  to  power, 
so  great  was  his  popularity.  But  he  died  at  the  early  age  of 
forty-seven,  having  been  successively  a  Member  of  Parliament, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  59 

Solicitor-General  and  Attorney-General.  Had  his  health  been 
spared  he  would  doubtless  have  reached  the  highest  places  in  his 
profession.  He  was  a  singularly  kind,  considerate  and  obliging 
man  and  these  traits  contributed  greatly  to  his  success.  Sumner 
received  many  courtesies  from  him  and  was  attached  to  him. 

Thomas  Wilde,  the  other  of  these  friends,  was  then  fifty-six 
years  of  age.  Sumner  wrote  of  him :  "  After  his  entrance  to  the 
profession,  he  was  guilty  of  one  of  those  moral  delinquencies 
which  are  so  severely  visited  in  England.  I  have  heard  the 
story,  but  have  forgotten  it.  In  some  way  he  took  advantage 
of  a  trust  relation,  and  purchased  for  himself.  He  was  at  once 
banished  from  the  Circuit  table.  A  long  life  of  laborious  in 
dustry,  attended  by  the  greatest  success,  has  not  yet  placed  him 
in  communication  with  the  bar ;  and  it  is  supposed  that  he  can 
never  hope  for  any  of  those  offices  by  which  talent  and  success 
like  his  are  usually  rewarded.  I  think  it,  however,  not  im 
probable  that  the  government,  in  their  anxiety  to  avail  them 
selves  of  his  great  powers,  may  forget  the  past;  but  society 
will  not.  He  does  not  mingle  with  the  bar, — or  if  he  does,  it 
is  with  downcast  eyes  and  with  a  look  which  seems  to  show 
that  he  feels  himself  out  of  place.  He  is  the  most  industrious 
person  at  the  English  bar ;  being  at  his  chambers  often  till  two 
o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  at  work  again  by  six  o'clock.  His 
arguments  are  all  elaborated  with  the  greatest  care;  and  he 
comes  to  court  with  a  minute  of  every  case  that  can  bear  upon 
the  matter  in  question.  In  the  Common  Pleas  he  is  supreme, 
and  is  said  to  exercise  a  great  influence  over  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Tindal.  He  once  explained  to  me  the  secret  of  his  success ;  he 
said  that  he  thoroughly  examined  all  his  cases  and,  if  he  saw 
that  a  case  was  bad,  in  the  strongest  language  he  advised  its 
adjustment ;  if  it  was  good  he  made  himself  a  perfect  master  of 
it.  He  is  engaged  in  every  cause  in  the  Common  Pleas.  In 
person  he  is  short  and  stout,  and  has  a  vulgar  face.  His  voice 
is  not  agreeable;  but  his  manner  is  singularly  energetic  and 
intense, — reminding  me  in  this  respect  of  Webster  more  than 
any  other  person  at  the  English  bar.  If  you  take  this  into  con 
sideration  in  connection  with  his  acknowledged  talents  and  his 
persevering  industry,  you  will  not  be  at  a  loss  to  account  for 
his  great  success.  I  have  been  told  that  he  was  once  far  from 
fluent;  but  now  he  expresses  himself  with  the  greatest  ease. 
His  language  has  none  of  the  charms  of  literature;  but  it  is 
correct,  expressive,  and  to  the  purpose.  In  manner,  to  his 
friends,  he  seems  warm  and  affable.  To  me  he  has  shown  much 
volunteer  kindness.  I  have  conversed  with  him  on  some  points 
of  professional  conduct,  and  found  him  entertaining  very  ele- 


GO  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

vated  views.  He  told  me  that  he  should  never  hesitate  to  cite 
a  case  that  bore  against  him,  if  he  thought  court  and  the 
opposite  counsel  were  not  aware  of  it  at  the  moment." 

Notwithstanding  the  prediction  of  the  fatal  consequences  of 
Wilde's  early  mistake,  his  talents  and  industry  did  at  last  reap 
their  merited  reward;  After  he  was  fifty-eight  years  of  age,  he 
became  successively  Solicitor-General,  Attorney-General,  Chief 
Justice  and  finally  Lord  Chancellor ;  and  was  then  raised  to  the 
Peerage. 

From  Bodmin,  Sumner  passed  farther  into  Cornwall  to  visit 
the  High  Sheriff  at  his  castle,  and  then  he  returned  to  the 
coast,  to  Plymouth,  to  view  the  spot,  always  of  interest  to  him 
as  the  point  of  departure  of  the  Pilgrims  on  their  passage  to 
the  bleak  shores  of  Massachusetts;  now  one  of  the  great  naval 
arsenals  of  the  kingdom.  Here  a  barge  was  placed  at  his  dis 
posal,  so  that  he  could  visit  the  ships  in  port  and  an  officer  was 
also  detailed  by  the  Commander  of  the  largest  vessel,  to  show 
him  the  shipyards. 

From  Plymouth,  through  Devon,  he  passed  to  Taunton  in 
Somerset,  where  he  spent  two  days,  the  guest  of  Sydney  Smith, 
master  of  English  wit  and  literature,  at  his  pretty  cottage, 
Combe  Flory.  He  had  met  Smith  in  London,  where  they  be 
came  friendly,  and  he  was  invited  to  visit  him  at  home.  Here, 
with  this  prince  of  conversation,  was  entertainment.  On  leav 
ing,  his  host  gave  him  a  book  to  remind  him  of  his  visit  and 
also  a  list  of  his  essays  published  in  the  Edinburgh  Review 
and  elsewhere,  characterizing  the  essays  as  containing  "  liberal 
sentiment  expressed  always  with  some  wit ".  Sumner  urged 
Hillard  to  publish  an  American  edition  of  these  essays.  Such 
an  edition  has  since  been  issued. 

Sumner  met  the  Western  Circuit  again  at  Wells  and  wa<* 
there  the  guest  of  the  bar.  From  Wells  he  went  to  Bristol  and 
Chester.  Here  Justice  Vaughan,  who  was  then  holding  court 
called  him  to  his  side  on  the  bench.  From  Chester  he  went  to 
Liverpool,  where  Baron  Alderson,  of  the  Northern  Circuit 
was  holding  the  assizes.  He  had  never  met  him,  but  he  brought 
letters  of  introduction  from  Justice  Yaughan,  Lord  Brougham 
and  others. 

There  has  been  frequent  opportunity  in  these  pages  to  note 
the  friendly  relation  of  members  of  the  English  bar  to  each 
other.  There  seemed  to  exist  among  them  the  tie  of  a  guild  or 
fraternity,  an  introduction  to  whose  circle  gave  to  the  recipient 
whatever  of  courtesy  and  kindness  the  membership  could  con 
tribute.  Sumner  met  many  men  of  other  professions  in  Eng 
land  to  whom  he  was  indebted  Cor  kindness,  but  the  narration  of 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  61 

his  journey  shows  that  he  was  under  the  greatest  obligation  to 
the  bar.  The  members  seemed  to  vie  with  one  another,  while  he 
was  on  the  Circuits,  in  passing  him  on  from  place  to  place,  and 
in  opening  each  avenue  of  interest  to  him,  toasting  and  feast 
ing  and  introducing  him,  though  knowing  him  only  as  an 
untitled  member  of  the  bar.  They  recognized  in  him  a  quiet, 
self-respecting,  appreciative  American  of  their  profession. 

The  same  tie  exists  among  lawyers  in  the  United  States,  but 
this  kindly  feeling  is  not  so  prevalent.  It  is  to  be  regretted 
that  in  America  so  little  time  is  given  to  the  amenities  of  the 
profession.  There  is  so  much  "  vim,  vigor  and  victory  "  and  so 
little  of  quiet,  friendly  communion ;  the  hustler  fills  so  large 
a  place  and  the  equally  industrious  man,  who  often  does  more 
and  better  work,  with  less  noise  and  friction,  attracts  so  little 
notice !  How  the  homely  wisdom  of  poor  Oliver  Goldsmith  is 
to  be  envied,  going  off  with  some  friends,  to  the  green  fields 
with  a  biscuit  in  his  pocket,  to  spend  a  "  shoemaker's  holi 
day",  in  the  shade  of  a  tree  or  on  the  bank  of  some  stream. 
If  it  were  to  obtain  oftener  among  members  of  the  bar  how 
many  of  the  hard  places  it  might  soften  and  how  much  of  bit 
terness  and  needless  asperity  it  might  remove !  Conflict  is  an 
essential  part  of  the  business  of  the  profession,  but  much  of  the 
bitterness  it  engenders  is  unnecessary. 

Sumner  found  no  end  of  good  cheer  in  Liverpool.  The  first 
day  he  attended  a  banquet  given  by  the  city  authorities  to  the 
judges;  the  second  day  he  dined  with  the  judges  to  meet  the 
bar;  the  third  with  the  Mayor  of  the  city;  the  fourth  with  the 
bar.  "  I  have  a  thousand  things  to  say  to  you,"  he  wrote  to 
Judge  Story,  "  about  the  law,  circuit  life  and  the  English 
judges.  I  have  seen  more  of  all  of  them  probably  than  ever 
fell  to  the  lot  of  a  foreigner."  At  a  banquet  in  Liverpool,  in 
responding  to  a  toast  proposed  by  Baron  Alderson,  he  attracted 
the  attention  of  Eobert  Ingham,  the  Member  of  Parliament  for 
South  Shields,  and  he  was  invited  to  become  his  guest  at  his 
town  and  country  homes,  during  the  sitting  at  Newcastle  of 
the  British  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science. 
Thither  we  went  on  the  twenty-second  of  August,  1838.  On  a 
headland  jutting  out  upon  the  German  Ocean,  with  its  waves 
lashing  the  rocky  coast,  stood  Westhoe  Hall,  the  seat  of  his  host. 
It  overlooked  Tynemouth  Priory,  whose  sturdy  but  graceful 
arches  were  the  witnesses  of  the  centuries  since  the  Conquest. 

Eobert  Ingham  was  one  of  the  purest  and  best  of  men,  a 
Member  of  Parliament  for  a  quarter  of  a  century,  not  brilliant, 
but  a  sensible,  conscientious  representative  of  the  people. 
Sumner  attended  the  meetings  of  the  British  Association  as  his 


62  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

guest  during  the  week  they  continued.  The  intervals  of  the 
meetings  were  pleasantly  spent  with  Ingham  and  his  friends. 
As  showing  the  style  of  English  country  life,  his  host  invited 
fourteen  gentlemen  to  meet  Sumner  and  to  spend  the  evening 
at  Westhoe  Hall  and  there  they  all  remained  the  whole  night. 

During  the  banquet  at  the  close  of  the  meetings  of  the  As 
sociation,  he  was  called  out  by  the  President,  the  Bishop  of 
Durham,  proposing  the  health  of  the  distinguished  foreigners 
present  and  singling  him  out  by  some  complimentary  remarks. 
He  responded  in  a  short  speech,  which  was  reported  in  the  New 
castle  papers.  It  was  afterwards  copied  into  the  Boston  papers. 
Thus  in  other  ways  the  news  of  his  success  abroad  reached  the 
Boston  public. 

At  the  adjournment  of  the  Association,  by  the  invitation  of 
the  Bishop  of  Durham,  he  accompanied  him  in  his  carriage  to 
his  house,  Auckland  Castle.  This  is  the  seat  of  the  most  power 
ful  Bishop  of  England.  He  remained  there  two  days  and  then 
went  to  visit  the  Eecorder  of  Newcastle  at  Harperly  Park. 
Here  he  spent  two  days  more,  riding  with  the  young  ladies  on 
horseback,  enjoying  excursions  over  the  country  and  the  visits 
in  the  neighborhood, — delightful  days,  when  all  were  young — 
with  spirits  buoyant  and  happy  and  care  thrown  away.  They 
entertained  him  with  their  tales  of  the  chase  and  of  their  mad 
rides  and  the  leaps  of  their  horses  over  fences  and  ditches,  in 
the  fox-hunts  common  in  the  locality.  His  own  curiosity  was 
easily  aroused  to  attempt  the  sport  himself. 

Two  days  more  he  spent  with  the  Member  of  Parliament  for 
Northumberland,  at  Oakwood,  on  the  Tyne,  twelve  miles  from 
Newcastle  and  then  he  went  to  shoot  grouse  with  Archdeacon 
Scott  on  the  moors  of  Whitfield  Eectory.  The  venerable  Arch 
deacon  loaned  him  a  hunting  shirt  and  a  pair  of  rough  shoes 
and  thus  clad,  in  his  company,  for  the  clergy  in  England  are 
skilled  in  the  sports  of  the  field,  they  started  out  for  a  hunt  on 
the  moors  and  fells.  The  dogs  started  several  coveys  of  grouse 
and  partridges,  but  Sumner  and  the  Archdeacon  maintained 
that  both  their  guns  missed  fire  and,  hence  only,  they  failed, 
through  the  whole  day,  to  bring  down  a  single  bird.  This  mis 
chance  is  not  to  be  wondered  at,  in  Sumner's  case,  of  whom  it 
is  not  recorded  that  he  ever  shot  a  gun  before,  but  it  is  damag 
ing  to  the  reputation  for  sportsmanship  of  a  clergyman  of  the 
Established  Church.  It  is  not  mentioned  that  the  Archdeacon 
killed  anything,  but  it  is  recorded  with  due  solemnity,  in  the 
Gamebook  of  Whitfield  Eectory,  that  Sumner  killed  one  hare. 

From  Whitfield  Eectory,  on  the  Archdeacon's  horse  and  at 
tended  by  his  groom,  Sumner  splashed,  through  showers  of 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  (53 

rain  over  the  moors  and  valleys  of  Northumberland,  to 
Brougham  Hall.  This  was  the  country  seat  of  Henry,  Lord 
Brougham,  former  Lord  Chancellor  of  England.  Joseph  Parkes 
had  introduced  them  in  London  and  the  acquaintance  which 
followed,,  renewed  again  in  1857,  was  a  pleasant  one  to  Sumner. 
He  was  asked  to  visit  Brougham  Hall,  when  on  the  Circuits, 
and  reached  there,  wet  and  tired,  about  the  middle  of  the 
afternoon  of  September  sixth.  As  soon  as  he  made  known  the 
discomforts  of  his  trip,  he  was  shown  to  his  apartments  and  en 
joyed  a  complete  change  of  clothing.  Who  has  not  felt  the 
warmth  and  glow  that  dry  clothes  and  comfortable  enter 
tainment  bring  over  one's  spirit,  after  such  a  trip?  The  very 
fatigue  of  the  journey  seemed  to  give  way  to  a  pleasurable 
sensation  of  health  and  vigor,  produced  by  the  exercise  of 
riding  in  the  open  air. 

The  evening,  and  the  next  day,  Sumner  spent  with  Lord 
Brougham.  His  mother  was  still  living  and  had  her  home 
with  him.  She  was  an  interesting  lady,  eighty-six  years  of 
age  and  a  niece  of  the  historian  Robertson.  Lord  Brougham 
was  one  of  the  marked  men  of  his  generation. 

He  was  born  in  Edinburgh  in  1779,  of  an  ancient  Westmore 
land  family  and  was  educated  at  the  high  school  and  uni 
versity  of  his  native  city.  Before  graduation  he  received  high 
credit  for  proficiency  in  scientific  studies.  As  a  boy  he  was 
very  ambitious  and  of  great  activity  both  of  mind  and  body, 
but  was  inclined  to  be  more  diffuse  than  exact  in  his  studies. 
He  read  law  and  commenced  to  practise  in  Edinburgh  and,  by 
his  earnestness  and  vigorous  fighting  propensities,  soon  became 
prominent,  especially  in  the  defence  of  a  class  of  cases  then 
very  common,  suits  for  libel.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  of 
the  Edinburgh  Review  and  continued  for  twenty  years  to  be 
one  of  its  regular  contributors.  He  early  removed  to  London 
and  there  reached  the  highest  rank  in  his  profession.  He  be 
came  Lord  Chancellor  in  1830  and  continued  to  hold  the  office 
until  1834.  He  died  in  1868,  eighty-nine  years  of  age. 

He  was  a  man  of  great  concentration  and  industry,  of  re 
markable  attainments  and  besides  the  work  of  his  profession 
and  his  office  was  the  author  of  several  books  of  permanent 
value.  But  it  is  as  an  orator  and  a  member  of  the  House  of 
Lords  that  he  is  best  remembered.  He  advocated  the  abolition 
of  slavery  and  the  dissolution  of  the  Canning  Ministry  and  was 
active  in  the  cause  of  popular  education  and  in  political  and 
legal  reforms.  As  an  orator,  he  was  intensely  in  earnest,  the 
fire  of  his  spirit  revealed  in  his  eye,  his  arms  swinging  easily 
but  forcibly  and  his  long  index  finger  seeming  to  point  out  with 


64  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

striking  directness  the  wrong  which  he  condemned.  Sumner 
heard  his  closing  speech  for  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves. 
It  is  difficult  to  tell  the  effect  of  that  speech  upon  Sumner's 
fortunes.  It  was  one  of  the  crowning,  by  some  thought  to  be 
the  greatest,  effort  of  Brougham's  life.  It  left  a  deep  impres 
sion  upon  Sumner  and  reminding  him  of  his  own  country, 
suffering  from  the  same  cause,  it  was  probably  one  of  the 
controlling  incidents  of  his  life. 

Brougham  Hall  had  been  the  seat  of  Lord  Brougham's 
family  for  centuries  and  though  his  life  was  largely  passed  in 
Edinburgh  and  London,  here  for  years  he  spent  the  vacations 
of  the  courts  and  Parliament,  not  in  polite  idleness,  but  in 
secluded  application,  to  the  cultivation  of  literature.  Here  his 
books  were  mostly  written.  Sumner  found  him  then  engaged 
upon  a  translation,  from  the  original  Greek,  of  Demosthenes' 
oration  for  the  crown.  It  was  an  ideal  spot  for  the  cultiva 
tion  of  literature,  such  a  one  as  would  have  delighted  Sir 
Walter  Scott, — a  courtyard  surrounded  with  battlements,  long 
halls  and  airy  rooms.  The  library  was  a  beautiful  apartment, 
with  panels  of  old  oak  and  a  rich  ceiling  of  the  same  ma 
terial,  emblazoned  with  numerous  heraldic  escutcheons  in  gold, 
a  beautiful  bow  window  commanding  the  fair  lawn  and  terraces 
about  the  house  and  the  distant  mountains,  in  whose  bosom  lay 
the  far-famed  lakes  of  England.  Here  Sumner  sat,  while  his 
host  dashed  off  more  letters  than  the  ten  the  law  allowed  him 
to  frank. 

A  friend,  an  old  clergyman,  came  in  soon  and  together  they 
dined,  Lord  Brougham's  mother  presiding  at  the  table,  with 
an  apparent  touch  of  motherly  pride,  in  the  greatness  of  her 
son.  After  dinner  the  three  gentlemen  sat  until  late  at  night, 
engaged  in  conversation,  or  rather  the  other  two  in  listening  to 
the  torrent  of  Lord  Brougham's  about  his  contemporaries,  his 
anecdotes  of  them,  about  America  and  Americans  and  books. 
He  had  one  habit  that  Sumner  characterized  as  "  bad  and 
vulgar  beyond  expression, — I  mean  swearing  " .  He  added ; 
"  I  have  dined  in  company  nearly  every  day  since  I  have  been 
in  England,  and  I  do  not  remember  to  have  met  a  person  who 
swore  half  so  much  as  Lord  Brougham; — and  all  this  in  con 
versation  with  an  aged  clergyman !  " 

The  next  morning  Sumner  took  his  departure.  Lord 
Brougham  already  had  his  books  down,  ready  for  work.  He 
franked  a  letter  for  Sumner  to  Hillard,  thanked  him  for  his 
visit,  shook  him  cordially  by  the  hand,  apologized  for  not  ac 
companying  him  to  the  door,  and  before  he  had  left  the  library, 
Lord  Brougham's  head  was  down,  absorbed  in  his  work. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  65 

From  Brougham  Hall,  Sunnier  went  to  Keswick  to  see  the 
poet  Wordsworth,  where  on  September  8,  he  wrote  Hillard : 
"  I  have  seen  Wordsworth !  Your  interest  in  this  great  man, 
and  the  contrast  which  he  presents  to  that  master-spirit 
(Brougham)  I  have  already  described  to  you,  induce  me  to 
send  these  lines  immediately  on  the  heels  of  my  last.  How  odd 
it  seemed  to  knock  at  a  neighbor's  door  and  inquire,  '  Where 
does  Mr.  Wordsworth  live?  Think  of  rapping  at  Westminster 
Abbey  and  asking  for  Mr.  Shakespeare  or  Mr.  Milton !  I  found 
the  poet  living  as  I  could  have  wished,  with  worldly  comfort 
about  him  and  without  show.  His  house  was  not  large  or  so 
elegant  as  to  draw  the  attention  from  its  occupant;  and  more 
truly  did  I  enjoy  myself,  for  the  short  time  I  was  under  his 
roof,  than  when  in  the  emblazoned  halls  of  Lord  Brougham. 
The  house  is  situated  on  the  avenue  leading  to  Eydal  Hall; 
and  the  poet  may  enjoy,  as  if  they  were  his  own,  the  trees  of 
the  park  and  the  ancestral  cawing  of  the  rooks  that  almost 
darkened  the  air  with  their  numbers.  His  house  and  grounds 
are  pretty  and  neat;  and  he  was  so  kind  as  to  attend  me  in  a 
turn  round  his  garden,  pointing  out  several  truly  delightful 
views  of  the  lakes  and  mountains.  I  could  not  but  remark  to 
him,  however,  that  the  cawing  of  the  rooks  was  more  interest 
ing  to  me  than  even  the  remarkable  scenery  before  us.  The 
house  itself  is  unlike  those  in  which  I  have  been  received  lately ; 
and  in  its  whole  style  reminded  me  more  of  home  than  any 
thing  I  have  seen  in  England.  I  took  tea  with  the  poet,  and, 
for  the  first  time  since  I  have  been  in  this  country,  saw  a  circle 
round  a  table  at  this  meal;  and,  indeed,  it  was  at  six  o'clock, 
when  always  before  in  England  I  have  been  preparing  for 
dinner.  I  mention  these  little  things  in  order  to  give  you  a 
familiar  view  of  Wordsworth.  I  cannot  sufficiently  express  to 
you  my  high  gratification  at  his  manner  and  conversation.  It 
was  simple,  graceful  and  sincere.  *  *  *  I  felt  that  I  was  con 
versing  with  a  superior  being;  yet  I  was  entirely  at  my  ease. 
He  told  me  that  he  was  sixty-nine, — at  an  age  when,  in  the 
course  of  nature,  the  countenance  loses  the  freshness  of  younger 
years,  but  his  was  still  full  of  expression.  Conversation  turned 
on  a  variety  of  topics;  and  here  I  have  little  to  record;  for 
there  were  no  salient  parts,  though  all  was  sensible,  instructive 
and  refined." 

Sumner  carried  a  letter  of  introduction  to  Wordsworth 
from  Washington  Allston,  the  artist.  Professor  Cleaveland  of 
Bowdoin  had  given  him  a  letter  to  Sir  David  Brewster.  He 
had  expected  to  see  Southey  at  Keswick,  but  he  was  absent 
making  a  tour  of  the  Continent.  At  Wordsworth's  house,  how- 


66  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ever,  he  met  and  dined  with  Southey's  daughter.  From  Kes- 
wick  he  went  to  Melrose,  where  Sir  David  Brewster  lived.  He 
was  an  experimental  philosopher  and  author  of  a  life  of  Sir 
Isaac  Newton. 

Sept.  12,  1838,  Sumner  wrote:  "I  am  now  the  guest  of  Sir 
David  Brewster,  and  am  writing  in  my  bedroom,  which  looks 
upon  the  Tweed  and  Melrose  Abbey  and  the  Eildon  Hills. 
Abbotsford  is  a  short  distance  above,  on  the  opposite  side; 
while  the  cottages  of  Lockhart,  and  that  fast  friend  of  Scott, 
Sir  Adam  Ferguson,  are  within  sight.  I  spent  the  whole  of 
to-day  in  rambling  with  Sir  David  about  Melrose,  noting  all  the 
spots  hallowed  by  Scott's  friendship  or  genius,  and  finally  pay 
ing  my  pilgrimage  to  his  tomb  at  Dry  burgh  Abbey.  At  dinner 
we  had  Sir  Adam  Ferguson  himself  and  Mr.  Todd, — the  latter 
a  Scottish  Judge,  and  an  old  friend  of  Sir  Walter,  as  well  as 
Sir  Adam.  I  need  not  say  to  you  how  inexpressibly  interesting 
was  the  whole  day,  passed  in  such  company, — observing  house 
after  house  in  whose  hospitality  Sir  Walter  had  taken  pleas 
ure,  and  whose  plantations  he  had  watched;  then  regarding 
with  melancholy  interest,  the  simple  sod,  in  the  midst  of  some 
venerable  ruins,  which  covers  his  precious  dust.  And  what  a 
crown  was  it,  of  the  whole  day,  to  dine  among  his  chosen  friends, 
— to  hear  their  simple,  heart  touching  expressions  of  regard, 
and  the  numerous  narrations,  all  untold  in  print  which  serve 
to  illustrate  his  character  and  genius/' 

From  Melrose  Sumner  went  to  Craig  Crook  Castle,  the  home 
of  Lord  Jeffrey,  then  the  managing  editor  of  the  Edinburgh 
Review,  where  he  spent  a  portion  of  a  day.  He  reached 
Edinburgh  on  September  twentieth,  and  here  and  in  the 
neighborhood  he  spent  nine  days.  During  this  time  he  re 
ceived  constant  attention  from  Lord  Jeffrey  and  his  nephew, 
Thomas  Brown,  whom  Sumner  had  met  in  Canada  during  his 
tour  in  1836.  Brown  shortly  after  that  visited  Boston  and  there 
the  acquaintance  ripened  into  intimacy.  It  is  unnecessary 
to  add  that  the  best  circles  of  Edinburgh  were  opened  to  Sum 
ner,  when  his  own  ability  to  make  friends  was  supported  by 
Lord  Jeffrey.  He  had  written  Sumner  in  advance,  rather  dis 
paragingly  of  his  prospect,  regretting  that  all  the  lawyers  were 
off  on  their  vacation,  shooting  grouse.  But  the  sequel  showed 
his  fears  were  groundless,  for  Sumner  was  entertained  every 
evening  of  his  stay,  saying  nothing  of  breakfasts,  and  was 
besides  obliged  to  decline  many  invitations.  Sumner  liked 
Lord  Jeffrey. 

He  wrote  to  Hillard :  "  Jeffrey  against  all  the  world !  while 
in  Edinburgh  I  saw  much  of  him  and  his  talent,  fertility  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  67 

expression  and  unlimited  information  (almost  learning)  im 
pressed  me  more  and  more.  He  spoke  on  every  subject,  and 
always  better  than  anybody  else.  Sydney  Smith  is  infinitely 
pleasant,  and  instructive  too ;  but  the  flavor  of  his  conversation 
is  derived  from  its  humor.  Jeffrey  is  not  without  humor,  but 
this  is  not  a  leading  element.  He  pleases  by  the  alternate  ex 
ercise  of  every  talent ;  at  one  moment  by  a  rapid  argument,  then 
by  a  beautiful  illustration,  next  by  a  phrase  which  draws  a 
whole  thought  into  its  powerful  focus,  while  a  constant  grace 
of  language  and  amenity  of  manners  with  proper  contributions 
from  humor  and  wit,  heighten  these  charms.  I  have  been 
fortunate  in  knowing  as  I  have  known, — aye,  in  knowing  at 
their  hearths — the  three  great  men  of  the  Edinburgh  Re 
view — Smith,  Brougham  and  Jeffrey.  But  there  is  a  fourth, 
— John  A.  Murray,  the  present  Lord  Advocate  of  Scotland. 
It  was  Murray  who  gave  the  motto,  at  which  Sydney  Smith 
laughed, — '  Judex  damnatur  cum  nocens  dbsolvitur' — from 
Publius  Syrus,  though  he  was  innocent  of  having  read 
Syrus." 

From  Edinburgh  Sumner  went  to  visit  his  friend,  the 
nephew  of  Lord  Jeffrey,  Thomas  Brown,  at  his  home,  Lanfire 
House,  near  Kilmarnock,  Ayrshire.  He  remained  there  five 
days,  recalling  former  scenes  and  making  new  friends,  reading 
in  the  library  or  enjoying  the  beautiful  prospects  from  its  win 
dows,  rambling  about  the  woods,  extending  for  more  than  a 
mile  on  either  side  of  the  house,  or  riding  about  the  estate,  so 
extensive  that  one  might  go  twenty  miles  without  passing  be 
yond  its  limits.  Here  amid  Highland  scenery  he  also  enjoyed 
the  festivities  of  a  Highland  wedding. 

In  the  contrast  between  the  life  of  Brown  and  his  uncle, 
Lord  Jeffrey,  there  is  illustrated  a  fact  too  often  overlooked  by 
Americans.  Brown  was  an  easy-going  young  man  of  ability 
but  without  a  definite  aim  in  life.  He  was  well  educated  and, 
as  a  son  of  the  sister  of  Lord  Jeffrey  might  be  expected  to  be, 
of  fine  literary  taste  and  on  intimate  terms  with  such  men  as 
Talfourd,  the  eminent  barrister,  essayist  and  judge  of  Edin 
burgh.  He  had  travelled  much,  was  an  easy  conversationalist, 
full  of  anecdote  and  a  delightful  companion.  He  spent  a  good 
deal  of  his  time  in  Edinburgh  and  London  at  the  clubs,  of 
which  he  was  a  member,  in  dignified  and  elegant  idleness. 

On  the  other  hand  his  noble  uncle,  Lord  Jeffrey,  was  a  toil 
ing  barrister  and  author,  the  chief  editor  of  the  Edinburgh 
Eeview  in  its  best  days.  He  opened  a  new  era  in  English 
Literature  and  rose  to  the  rank  of  an  eminent  Scottish  Judge. 
As  a  reviewer  he  has  had  no  superior.  He  was  the  early,  and,  to 


68  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  end  of  his  life,  the  intimate  friend  of  Carlyle,  whom  he 
found  a  struggling  young  author  of  talent,  but  without  a  read 
ing  public,,  and  he  opened  the  columns  of  the  "  Review  "  to  him 
and  assisted  him  to  recognition;  he  first  saw  and  criticised 
privately  and  published  the  inimitable  article  on  "  Burns." 
Carlyle  recognized  the  debt  and  after  they  were  all  gone  he 
permanently  associated  Lord  Jeffrey's  name  with  those  of  his 
wife  and  father  in  his  volume  of  "  Reminiscences  ". 

He  has  given  us  this  description  of  him :  "  Jeffrey  rose  into 
higher  and  higher  professional  repute.  *  *  *  I  honestly  ad 
mired  him  *  *  *  was  always  glad  to  notice  him,  when  I  strolled 
into  the  courts,  and  eagerly  enough  stepped  up  to  hear  if  I 
found  him  pleading;  a  delicate,  attractive,  dainty  little  figure, 
as  he  merely  walked  about,  much  more  if  he  were  speaking; 
uncommonly  bright  black  eyes,  instinct  with  vivacity,  intelli 
gence,  and  kindly  fire;  roundish  brow,  delicate  oval  face,  full 
of  rapid  expression,  figure  light,  nimble,  pretty,  though  small, 
perhaps  hardly  five  feet  in  height,  wore  his  black  hair  closely 
dipt." 

It  is  sad  to  notice,  in  contrast,  the  later  picture  Carlyle  gives 
us  of  him, — burdened  with  the  cares  of  his  judicial  office,  in 
ill  health,  the  vivacity  and  grace  of  his  early  days  gone,  wear 
ing  out  and  breaking  down,  how  it  brought  back  the  pregnant 
remark  of  Talfourd,  on  a  career  at  the  bar :  "  A  life  of  success 
though  a  life  of  excitement  is  also  a  life  of  constant  toil  in 
which  the  pleasures  of  contemplation  and  society  are  sparingly 
felt  and  it  sometimes  leads  to  a  melancholy  close." 

The  life  of  Lord  Jeffrey  illustrates  a  fact  we  sometimes  for 
get,  that  the  nobility  of  Great  Britain  are  by  no  means  an  idle 
class.  Their  lives  are  frequently  full  of  strenuous  exertion. 
In  their  great  houses,  upon  their  extensive  estates,  with  the 
number  of  their  servants  and  dependants  around  them,  neces 
sary  to  the  successful  and  profitable  management  of  their  prop 
erty,  they  often  approach  a  style  of  living  akin  to  royalty.  But 
it  has  been  well  said  that  a  great  estate  is  no  sinecure  if  it  is 
to  be  kept  great.  The  heads  of  these  houses  are  often  perplexed 
with  cares  that  the  quiet  passer  little  heeds  nor  long  remembers. 
The  most  of  the  enjoyment  falls  to  the  lot  of  the  young  mem 
bers  of  their  families,  like  Sumner's  friend  Brown,  who  had 
not  yet  come  to  the  care  of  the  estates.  But  they  are  usually 
trained  to  good  habits  and  a  correct  mode  of  life,  in  anticipa 
tion  of  future  responsibilities  and  usefulness. 

Brown's  father  and  mother  were  still  living.  She  reminded 
Sumner  of  her  brother  Lord  Jeffrey.  She  manifestly  had 
some  of  his  tastes,  for  Sumner  remarked  that  the  walls  of  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  69 

library  at  Lanfire  House  were  full  of  books  from  the  floor  to 
the  ceiling. 

Sunnier  reluctantly  left  this  delightful  retreat.  He  went  to 
Dumbarton,  nestjing  on  the  river  Clyde,  at  the  foot  of  the 
famous  fortress-crowned  rock  that  gave  its  name  to  the  town. 
Like  a  great  frowning  Gibraltar  it  seemed  to  have  protected 
the  town  from  the  feuds  of  former  years. 

Talfourd  had  taken  for  the  summer  Glenarbuck  Cottage, 
about  four  miles  from  Dumbarton.  Sumner  visited  and  dined 
with  him  there.  He  was  invited  to  be  his  guest  while  at  Dum 
barton,  but  this  he  had  declined  and  having  spent  a  day  wander 
ing  over  his  wild  grounds  and  along  the  Clyde,  he  pursued  his 
way  to  Strachur  Park,  on  Loch  Fyne,  opposite  Inverary.  This 
was  the  home  of  Murray,  the  Lord  Advocate  of  Scotland.  It 
was  in  the  heart  of  the  Highlands,  on  one  of  those  lovely  sheets 
of  water  that  give  a  charm  to  the  scenery.  It  was  surrounded 
by  mountains  whose  ragged  forms  were  mirrored  at  his  feet  in 
the  clear  waters  of  the  loch.  He  crossed  Loch  Lomond  and  by 
the  moon's  light  rowed  over  Loch  Katrine;  and  visited  the 
island  of  the  "  Lady  of  the  Lake,"  embalmed  all  of  them,  in 
scenes  of  Scott's  minstrelsy. 

"  No  pathway  meets  the  wanderer's  ken 
Unless  he  climb  with  footing  nice, 
A  far  projecting  precipice 
The  broom's  tough  roots  his  ladder  made. 
The  hazel  saplings  lent  their  aid ; 
And  thus  an  airy  point  he  won, 
Where,  gleaming  with  the  setting  sun, 
One  burnished  sheet  of  living  gold, 
Loch  Katrine  lay  beneath  him  roll'd, 
In  all  her  length  far  winding  lay 
With  promontory,  creek,  and  bay, 
And  islands  that  empurpled  bright 
Floated  amid  the  livelier  light, 
Where  mountains  that  like  giants  stand 
To  sentinel  enchanted  land." 

Sumner  reached  Stirling,  a  city  like  Dumbarton,  on  October 
seventh.  The  fortress  crowning  the  eminence  two  hundred  and 
twenty  feet  above  the  plain  in  which  the  city  stands,  was  built 
centuries  before,  and  around  it,  more  than  any  other  in  Scot 
land,  rolled  the  waves  of  Highland  warfare.  Its  pride  ante 
dated  the  union  of  the  two  kingdoms. 

From  Stirling  he  went  to  Glasgow  and  then  crossing  the 
Irish  Sea  he  spent  some  days  in  Dublin,  the  guest  of  Lord 
Morpeth,  then  Chief  Secretary,  but  afterwards  Lord  Lieutenant 
of  Ireland.  This  was  the  beginning  of  a  lifelong  friendship. 


70  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

From  Dublin  he  returned  to  England,  reaching  Yorkshire 
on  October  twenty-first.  He  spent  the  next  two  weeks  in  visit 
ing  at  three  of  the  most  famous  country  seats  in  the  kingdom, 
— Wortley  Hall,  the  seat  of  Lord  Wharncliffe;  Wentworth 
House,  the  seat  of  Earl  Fitzwilliam  and  Holkham  House,  the 
seat  of  Earl  Leicester. 

"  I  have  passed  three  agreeable  nights  at  Wortley,"  he  wrote 
Judge  Story.  "  Before  I  came  here,  Lord  Morpeth  told  me  that 
I  should  find  Wentworth  magnificent  and  Wortley  comfortable. 
And  you  may  conceive  an  English  Peer's  idea  of  comfort  when 
I  tell  you  that  Wortley  Hall  is  a  spacious  edifice,  built  by  the 
husband  of  Lady  Mary  Wortley  Montagu.  I  do  not  know  an 
edifice  like  it  in  the  United  States,  with  extensive  domains. 
Wharncliffe  Park,  which  belongs  to  it,  contains  of  itself  eight 
een  hundred  acres,  in  which  the  deer  are  ranging.  Everything 
about  it  is  elegant." 

Sumner  reached  Wentworth  House  on  the  evening  of  October 
twenty-fourth  after  dark,  as  the  family  were  going  in  to  din 
ner.  He  was  at  once  shown  to  his  room,  by  the  groom  of  the 
chambers,  and  having  dressed  got  into  the  dining-room  just 
after  the  disappearance  of  fish  and  found  a  place  reserved  for 
him  by  the  side  of  Lady  Charlotte,  the  eldest  daughter  of  his 
host,  Lord  Fitzwilliam.  There  were  twenty-five  or  more  at 
table.  In  the  chapel  that  evening  at  prayers  there  were  about 
fifty  servants  constituting  the  household  establishment.  The 
house  and  estate  once  belonged  to  the  great  Earl  of  Strafford 
and  many  of  the  books  in  the  library  contained  his  autograph. 
There  too  were  all  the  papers  of  Edmund  Burke, — his  letters, 
essays  and  unpublished  manuscripts. 

It  should  be  added  here  that  Lord  Fitzwilliam  at  whose  seat, 
Wentworth  House,  Sumner  was  now  visiting  was  the  descend 
ant  and  legal  representative  of  Thomas  Wentworth,  the  Earl  of 
Strafford  of  the  reign  of  Charles  I,  who  as  Lord  Deputy  of 
Ireland  had  governed  that  country  with  great  administrative 
ability,  but  at  the  same  time  with  almost  intolerable  severity 
and  whose  <e  thoroughness  "  was  again  called  into  requisition  to 
suppress  the  Scots  who  had  revolted  against  the  King.  In  the 
struggle  of  the  Commons  against  the  King,  Strafford  was  im 
peached,  condemned  to  death  and  beheaded.  Among  the  art 
treasures  of  Wentworth  House,  was  an  original  portrait  of  the 
great  Earl  by  Vandyke,  which  Sumner  admired.  His  "  won 
derful  features  "  were  thus  preserved  to  posterity  on  the  es 
tates  he  had  founded  and  in  the  halls  once  familiar  with  his 
presence. 

At  Wentworth  Sumner  was  invited  by  Mr.   Thompson  to 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  71 

spend  a  day,  before  going  to  Holkham  House,  at  his  home  Fair- 
field  Lodge  near  York,  whence  he  could  visit  the  famous  Min 
ster.  He  had  already  seen  Salisbury  and  Durham  cathedrals. 
He  confessed  that  these  famous  structures  made  a  deep  im 
pression  upon  him.  As  he  expressed  it  he  was  when  looking  at 
them  a  in  communion  with  no  single  mind, — bright  and  gifted 
though  it  be, — but  with  whole  generations  ",  and  the  voiceless 
walls  seemed  to  speak,  and  the  olden  time,  with  its  sceptred 
palls,  to  pass  before  him.  He  accepted  Mr.  Thompson's  invi 
tation,  but  in  viewing  York  Minster  he  was  to  be  disappointed. 
He  saw  it  on  a  rainy  day,  when  it  was  inconvenient  to  be  out 
and  the  view  of  its  height  and  proportions  was  obscured,  so 
the  pleasure,  he  had  experienced  on  viewing  Salisbury  and 
Durham  cathedrals,  was  lost. 

Farther  along  the  road  to  Holkham  he  stopped  at  Boston, 
"  not  famous  Boston/'  he  wrote,  "  where  I  first  drew  the  breath 
but  the  small  place  on  the  distant  coast  of  Lincolnshire, 
whence  John  Cotton,  ( whose  fame  was  in  all  the  churches ', 
went  to  settle  our  New  England."  He  saw  the  old  parsonage 
which  Cotton  had  left  for  the  woods  of  America  and  tapped  at 
the  back  door,  with  a  venerable  triangular  knocker,  the  same 
doubtless  the  hands  of  the  Puritan  preacher  had  known  before 
he  forsook  the  soft  cushion  of  the  Established  Church  and  that 
"fine  Gothic  pile",  the  parish  church  of  Boston,  built  in  the 
time  of  Edward  III,  on  which  so  many  centuries  had  since 
shed  their  sunshine  and  pelted  their  storms. 

Sumner  reached  Holkham  House  on  the  first  of  November, 
1838.  The  owner  of  the  estate,  Thomas  William  Coke,  Earl 
of  Leicester,  had  inherited  it  from  his  uncle,  who  was  a  de 
scendant  of  Edward  Coke,  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  England,  and 
author  of  the  Commentaries  upon  Littleton.  The  present  Earl, 
was  eighty-six  years  old  though  he  lived  to  be  ninety.  He  had 
a  long  and  distinguished  Parliamentary  career  and  was  the 
friend  of  America.  He  moved  for  the  recognition  of  the  In 
dependence  of  the  Colonies  and  accounted  this  act  in  his  Par 
liamentary  career  the  proudest  event  of  his  life.  He  was  the 
warm  friend  of  Fox  and  in  early  life  of  Brougham.  His  mon 
arch,  George  IV,  visited  him  at  Holkham  and  familiarly  called 
him  "  Tom  ",  and  Fox,  "  Charles  ".  But  withal  he  was  an 
enthusiastic  farmer  and  devoted  much  time  upon  his  estate  to 
the  improvement  of  agriculture  and  was  reputed  to  be  te  the 
first  farmer  of  England  ".  His  seat,  where  Sumner  was  now 
his  guest,  was  one  of  the  most  famous  in  England. 

"  This  house,"  Sumner  wrote  Hillard,  "  has  not  the  fresh 
magnificence  of  Chatsworth  (the  princely  residence  of  the  Duke 


72  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

of  Devonshire),  the  feudal  air  of  Raby  and  Auckland  castles,  or 
the  grand  front  of  Wentworth;  but  it  seems  to  me  to  blend 
more  magnificence  and  comfort,  and  to  hold  a  more  complete 
collection  of  interesting  things,  whether  antiques,  pictures  or 
manuscripts,  than  any  seat  I  have  visited.  The  entrance  hall 
is  the  noblest  I  have  ever  seen;  and  the  suite  of  apartments  is 
the  best  arranged  for  show  and  comfort  that  can  be  imagined. 
With  the  doors  open  you  may  look  through  a  vista  of  eleven 
spacious  rooms ;  and  these  of  the  most  agreeable  proportions  and 
adorned  by  the  choicest  productions  of  the  pencil "  (by  Titian, 
Claude,  Vandyke,  Raphael,  Da  Vinci  and  Rubens  among 
others). 

From  Holkham,  Sumner  went  to  London,  reaching  there 
November  fourth,  1838,  and  at  once  found  himself  among 
friends  and  in  the  social  whirl  of  the  metropolis.  "  Put  two 
Bostons,  two  New  Yorks,  two  Philadelphias  and  two  Baltimores 
together/'  he  wrote,  and  you  may  have  an  idea  of  London. 
"  The  extent  and  variety  of  the  life  of  the  place  is  truly  won 
derful.  Among  banks  it  is  the  clearing-house  of  the  world ;  in 
commerce  and  letters,  it  is  its  capital.  Nowhere  else  is  there 
such  an  accumulation  of  learning  and  ability  and  wealth.  Its 
extent  is  so  vast  and  its  life  so  complicated  that  one  might 
spend  his  life  there  and  still  feel  that  he  did  not  know  the  half 
of  it."  Sumner  had  spent  two  months  there  before  and  he  was 
now  to  remain  four  more,  not  to  see  it  all,  but  to  see  some 
persons  and  things  of  especial  interest  to  him. 

Soon  after  his  return  he  had  an  opportunity  of  seeing  Wind 
sor  Castle,  the  residence  of  Queen  Victoria.  In  a  letter  to 
Hillard,  he  described  life,  in  the  house  of  the  Queen,  as  he 
saw  it.  His  description  deprives  it  of  a  good  deal  of  the  pomp 
and  circumstance,  which  the  ordinary  magazine  articles  have 
thrown  around  it. 

"  My  day  at  Windsor,"  he  wrote,  "  would  furnish  a  most  in 
teresting  chapter  of  chit-chat.  I  had  the  pleasure  of  making 
the  acquaintance,  at  Lord  Morpeth's  table,  of  Mr.  Rich,  the 
member  for  Knaresborough,  and  the  author  of  the  pamphlet, 
"  What  will  the  Peers  do  ?  "  He  is  one  of  the  gentlemen  of  the 
bedchamber  of  the  Queen;  or  as  they  are  called  under  the 
virgin  queen,  gentlemen-in-waiting.  He  was  kind  enough  to 
invite  me  to  visit  him  at  Windsor  Castle,  and  obtained  special 
permission  from  her  Majesty  to  show  me  the  private  rooms.  I 
went  down  to  breakfast  where  we  had  young  Murray,  the  head 
of  the  household,  Lord  Surrey,  etc.  Lord  Byron,  who,  you 
know,  was  a  captain  in  the  navy,  is  a  pleasant  rough  fellow, 
who  has  not  many  of  the  smooth  turns  of  the  courtier.  He 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  73 

came  rushing  into  the  rooms  where  we  were,  crying  out,  u  This 
day  is  a  real  sneezer;  it  is  a  rum  one  indeed.  Will  her  Maj 
esty  go  out  to-day  ? "  Lord  Surrey  hoped  she  would  not, 
unless  she  would  ride  at  the  "  slapping  pace "  at  which  she 
went  the  day  before,  which  was  twenty  miles  in  two  hours. 
You  understand  that  her  suite  accompany  the  Queen  in  her 
equestrian  excursions.  Lord  Byron  proposed  to  breakfast  with 
us;  but  they  told  him  that  he  must  go  upstairs  and  breakfast 
with  the  "gals", — meaning  the  ladies  of  the  bedchamber  and 
maids  of  honor,  Countess  Albemarle,  Lady  Byron,  Lady  Little 
ton,  Miss  Cavendish,  etc/' 

During  the  early  days  of  December,  Sumner  visited  Oxford 
and  while  there  was  the  guest  of  Sir  Charles  Vaughan  and 
occupied  a  room  in  the  University.  Keturning  to  London  on 
December  thirteenth,  after  four  days  spent  at  Oxford,  he  left  on 
the  fourteenth  to  spend  as  many  days  at  Cambridge.  Here  he 
dined  with  some  of  the  Professors  and  in  Trinity  College  with 
some  of  the  undergraduates  and  Fellows,  thus  meeting  many 
members  of  different  degrees  in  the  University.  He  was  in 
terested  in  the  courses  of  study  and  in  the  discipline.  Some 
of  the  tutors  wrote  out  for  him  the  requirements  for  degrees 
in  some  of  the  courses,  which  he  preserved  for  use  on  his  re 
turn  home.  He  remarked  the  thoroughness  of  the  examina 
tions  which  he  believed  could  not  be  passed  without  having 
completed  the  course  according  to  the  requirements.  From 
Cambridge  he  went  to  Milton  Park  to  spend  Christmas  and  a 
portion  of  the  holidays  as  the  guest  of  Lord  Fitzwilliam.  He 
had  been  specially  invited  when  visiting  his  Lordship  at  his 
other  seat,  Wentworth  House,  to  visit  Milton  Park  at  this 
time,  to  enjoy  an  English  fox-hunt.  He  wrote  his  impressions 
of  this  great  national  sport  to  Hillard. 

"  I  am  passing,"  he  wrote,  "  my  Christmas  week  with  Lord 
Fitzwilliam,  in  one  of  the  large  country-houses  of  Old  England. 
I  have  already  written  you  about  Wentworth  House.  The 
place  where  I  now  am  is  older  and  smaller;  in  America,  how 
ever,  it  would  be  vast.  The  house  is  Elizabethan.  Here  I 
have  been  enjoying  fox-hunting,  to  the  imminent  danger  of 
my  limbs  and  neck;  that  they  still  remain  intact  is  a  miracle. 
His  Lordship's  hounds  are  among  the  finest  in  the  kingdom, 
and  his  huntsman  is  reputed  the  best.  There  are  about  eighty 
couples;  the  expense  of  keeping  them  is  about  five  thousand 
pounds  a  year.  In  his  stables  there  are  some  fifty  or  sixty  hun 
ters  that  are  only  used  with  the  hounds,  and  of  course  are  unem 
ployed  during  the  summer.  The  exertion  of  a  day's  sport  is  so 
great  that  a  horse  does  not  go  out  more  than  once  in  a  week. 


7-1  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

I  think  I  have  never  participated  in  anything  more  exciting 
than  this  exercise.  The  history  of  my  exploit  will  confirm  this. 
The  morning  after  my  arrival  I  mounted  at  half-past  nine 
o'clock  a  beautiful  hunter  and  rode  with  Lord  Milton  about 
six  miles  to  the  place  of  meeting.  There  were  the  hounds  and 
hunters  and  whippers-in,  and  about  eighty  horsemen, — noble 
men  and  gentry  and  clergy  of  the  neighborhood,  all  beautifully 
mounted,  and  the  greater  part  in  red  coats,  leather  breeches 
and  white  top-boots.  The  hounds  were  sent  into  the  cover,  and 
it  was  a  grand  sight  to  see  so  many  handsome  dogs,  all  of  a 
size,  and  all  washed  before  coming  out,  rushing  into  the  under 
wood  to  start  the  fox.  We  were  unfortunate  in  not  getting  a 
scent  immediately,  and  rode  from  cover  to  cover;  but  soon  the 
cry  was  raised  (  Tally-ho ! ' — the  horn  was  blowcd — the  dogs 
barked — the  horsemen  rallied — the  hounds  scented  their  way 
through  the  cover  on  the  trail  of  the  fox  and  then  started  in 
full  run.  I  had  originally  intended  only  to  ride  to  cover  to  see 
them  throw  off,  and  then  make  my  way  home,  believing  myself 
unequal  to  the  probable  run;  but  the  chase  commenced,  and  I 
was  in  the  midst  of  it;  and  being  excellently  mounted,  nearly 
at  the  head  of  it,  never  did  I  see  such  a  scamper ;  and  never  did 
it  enter  into  my  head  that  horses  could  be  pushed  to  such 
speed  in  such  places.  We  dashed  through  and  over  the  bushes, 
leaping  broad  ditches,  splashing  in  brooks  and  mud  and  pass 
ing  over  fences  as  so  many  imaginary  lines.  My  first  fence  I 
shall  not  readily  forget.  I  was  near  Lord  Milton,  who  was 
mounted  on  a  thoroughbred  horse.  He  cleared  a  fence  before 
him.  My  horse  pawed  the  ground  and  neighed.  I  gave  him 
the  rein,  and  he  cleared  the  fence;  as  I  was  up  in  the  air  for 
one  moment,  how  was  I  startled  to  look  down  and  see  that 
there  was  not  only  a  fence  but  a  ditch!  He  cleared  the  ditch 
too.  I  have  said  it  was  my  first  experiment.  I  lost  my  balance, 
was  thrown  to  the  very  ears  of  the  horse,  but  in  some  way  or 
other  contrived  to  work  myself  back  to  the  saddle  without 
touching  the  ground  (see  some  of  the  hunting  pictures  of 
leaps,  etc.).  How  I  got  back  I  cannot  tell,  but  I  did  regain  my 
seat  and  my  horse  was  at  a  run  in  a  moment.  All  this  you 
will  understand  passed  in  less  time  by  far  than  it  will  take  to 
read  this  account.  One  moment  we  were  in  a  scamper  through 
a  ploughed  field,  another  over  a  beautiful  pasture,  and  another 
winding  through  the  devious  paths  of  a  wood.  I  think  I  may 
say  that  in  no  single  day  of  my  life  did  I  ever  take  as  much 
exercise.  I  have  said  I  mounted  at  nine  and  a  half  o'clock. 
It  wanted  twenty  minutes  of  five  when  I  finally  dismounted, 
not  having  been  out  of  the  saddle  more  than  thirty  seconds 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  75 

during  all  this  time,  and  then  only  to  change  my  horse,  taking 
a  fresh  one  from  a  groom  who  was  in  attendance.  During 
much  of  this  time  we  were  on  a  full  run/' 

"  The  next  day  had  its  incidents.  The  place  of  meeting  for 
the  hounds  was  fourteen  miles  from  the  house.  Our  horses 
were  previously  led  thither  by  grooms  and  we  rode  there  in  a 
carriage  and  four,  with  outriders,  and  took  our  horses  fresh. 
This  day  I  met  with  a  fall.  The  country  was  very  rough  and 
the  fences  often  quite  stiff  and  high.  I  rode  among  the  fore 
most,  and  in  going  over  a  fence  and  brook  together,  came  to  the 
f round.  My  horse  cleared  them  both  and  I  cleared  him,  for 
went  directly  over  his  head.  Of  course  he  started  off,  but  was 
soon  caught  by  Milton  and  a  parson,  who  had  already  made 
the  leap  very  successfully.  *  *  *  *  Every  day  that  I 
was  out  it  rained, — the  first  day  incessantly, — and  yet  I  was 
fully  unconscious  of  it,  so  interested  did  I  become  in  the  sport. 
Indeed  sportsmen  rather  wish  a  rain  because  it  makes  the 
ground  soft.  We  generally  got  home  about  five  o'clock;  and  I 
will  give  you  the  history  of  the  rest  of  the  day  that  you  may  see 
how  time  passes  in  one  of  the  largest  houses  in  England.  Din 
ner  was  early  because  the  sportsmen  returned  fatigued  and 
without  having  tasted  a  morsel  of  food  since  early  breakfast. 
So  after  our  return,  we  only  had  time  to  dress ;  and  at  five  and 
one-half  o'clock  assembled  in  the  library,  from  which  we  went  in 
to  dinner.  For  three  days  I  was  the  only  guest  here, — during 
the  last  four  we  have  had  Professor  Whewell, — so  that  I  can  de 
scribe  to  you  what  was  simply  the  family  establishment.  One 
day  I  observed  that  there  were  only  nine  of  us  at  the  table  and 
there  were  thirteen  servants  in  attendance.  Of  course  the  serv 
ice  is  entirely  of  silver.  You  have  in  proper  succession,  soup, 
fish,  venison  and  the  large  English  dishes  besides  a  profusion 
of  French  entrees  with  ice-cream  and  ample  dessert, — Madeira, 
sherry,  claret,  port  and  champagne.  We  do  not  sit  long  at 
table ;  but  return  to  the  library,  which  opens  into  two  or  three 
drawing-rooms  and  is  itself  used  as  the  principal  one,  where  we 
find  the  ladies  already  at  their  embroidery,  and  also  coffee. 
Conversation  goes  languidly.  The  boys  are  sleepy,  and  Lord 
Fitzwilliam  is  serious  and  melancholy;  and  very  soon  I  am 
willing  to  kill  off  an  hour  or  so  by  a  game  of  cards.  Some 
times  his  Lordship  plays,  at  other  times  he  slowly  peruses  the 
last  volume  of  Prescott's  "  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  ".  About 
eleven  o'clock  I  am  glad  to  retire  to  my  chamber,  which  is  a  very 
large  apartment,  with  two  large  oriel  windows  looking  out 
upon  the  lawns  where  the  deer  are  feeding.  There  I  find  a 
glowing  fire ;  and  in  one  of  the  various  easy-chairs  sit  and  muse 


76  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

while  the  fire  burns,  or  resort  to  the  pen,  ink  and  paper  which 
are  carefully  placed  on  the  table  near  me." 

On  December  twenty-eighth,  Sumner  was  back  in  London 
again.  On  January  sixth,  1839,  he  made  an  excursion  to  Strat- 
ford-on-Avon  to  spend  a  day  among  the  scenes  familiar  in  the 
early  and  later  life  of  Shakespeare.  He  visited  Kenilworth  and 
Warwick  Castles  in  the  same  neighborhood  and  extended  his 
excursions  as  far  as  Birmingham.  The  remainder  of  his  time 
till  March  twenty-second  he  spent  in  London.  He  had  spent 
his  time  there  before  mostly  with  members  of  the  bar  and  the 
judges;  but  now  his  acquaintance  became  more  general  and  to 
this  period  must  be  referred  the  rich  fund  of  reminiscence 
which  London  always  recalled  to  him.  His  associations  were 
with  literary  men,  orators  and  statesmen,  as  well,  of  course,  as 
members  of  his  own  profession.  His  letters  do  not  indicate 
that  he  was  much  attracted  to  the  fair  sex,  but  occasional  refer 
ences  reveal  that  he  was  not  insensible  to  female  beauty.  Take, 
for  instance,  the  description  he  gives  of  a  dinner  with  the  four 
granddaughters  of  Eichard  Brinsley  Sheridan,  daughters  of 
his  son  Thomas,  the  poet. 

"  One  of  the  pleasantest  dinners,"  he  wrote  Hillard,  "  I  ever 
enjoyed  was  with  Mrs.  Norton.  She  now  lives  with  her  uncle 
Mr.  Charles  Sheridan,  who  is  a  bachelor.  We  had  a  small  com 
pany, — Old  Edward  Ellice ;  Fonblanque,  whose  writings  you  so 
much  admire ;  Hayward ;  Phipps,  the  brother  of  the  Marquis 
Normanby;  Lady  Seymour,  the  sister  of  Mrs.  Norton;  and 
Lady  Graham,  the  wife  of  Sir  John  Graham;  and  Mrs.  Phipps. 
All  of  these  are  very  clever  people;  Ellice,  whose  influence  is 
said,  more  than  that  of  all  other  men,  to  keep  the  present 
ministry  in  power ;  Fonblanque  is  harsh-looking,  rough  in  voice 
and  manner,  but  talks  with  the  same  knowledge  and  sententious 
brilliancy  with  which  he  writes.  But  the  women  were  by  far 
more  remarkable  than  the  men.  I  unhesitatingly  say  that  they 
were  the  four  most  beautiful,  clever  and  accomplished  women  I 
have  ever  seen  together.  The  beauty  of  Mrs.  Norton  has  never 
been  exaggerated.  It  is  brilliant  and  refined.  Her  countenance 
is  lighted  by  eyes  of  the  intensest  brightness  and  her  features 
are  of  the  greatest  regularity.  There  is  something  tropical  in 
her  look ;  it  is  so  intensely  bright  and  burning,  with  large,  dark 
eyes,  dark  hair  and  Italian  complexion.  And  her  conversa 
tion  is  so  pleasant  and  powerful  without  being  masculine,  or 
rather  it  is  masculine  without  being  mannish;  there  is  the  grace 
and  ease  of  the  woman  with  a  strength  and  skill  of  which  any 
man  might  well  be  proud.  Mrs.  Norton  is  about  twenty-eight 
years  old  and  is  I  believe  a  grossly  slandered  woman.  She  has 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  77- 

been  a  woman  of  fashion  and  has  received  many  attentions, 
which  doubtless  she  would  have  declined  had  she  been  brought 
up  under  the  advice  of  a  mother;  but  which  we  may  not 
wonder  she  did  not  decline,  circumstanced  as  she  was.  It  will 
be  enough  for  you,  and  I  doubt  not  you  will  be  happy  to 
hear  it  of  so  remarkable  and  beautiful  a  woman,  that  I  be 
lieve  her  entirely  innocent  of  the  grave  charges  (of  improper 
intimacy  with  Lord  Melbourne,  the  Prime  Minister)  that  have 
been  brought  against  her.  I  count  her  one  of  the  brightest  in 
tellects  I  have  ever  met.  I  whisper  in  your  ear  what  is  not  to 
be  published  abroad,  that  she  is  the  unaided  author  of  a  tract 
which  has  just  been  published  on  the  e  Infant  Custody  Bill ' 
and  purports  to  be  by  Pearce  Stevenson,  Esq,  nom  de  guerre. 
I  think  it  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  things  from  the  pen  of 
a  woman.  The  world  here  does  not  suspect  her,  but  supposes 
that  the  tract  is  the  production  of  some  grave  barrister.  It  is 
one  of  the  best  discussions  of  a  legislative  matter  I  have  ever 
read.  I  should  have  thought  Mrs.  Norton  the  most  beautiful 
woman  I  have  ever  seen,  if  her  sister  had  not  been  present.  I 
think  that  Lady  Seymour  is  generally  considered  the  more 
beautiful.  Her  style  of  beauty  is  unlike  Mrs.  Norton's;  her 
features  are  smaller  and  her  countenance  lighter  and  more 
English.  In  any  other  drawing-room  she  would  have  been 
deemed  quite  clever  and  accomplished,  but  Mrs.  Norton's  claim 
to  these  last  characteristics  are  so  pre-eminent  as  to  dwarf  the 
talents  and  attainments  of  others  of  her  sex  who  are  by  her 
side.  Lady  Seymour  has  no  claim  to  literary  distinction.  The 
homage  she  receives  is  offered  to  her  beauty  and  her  social  posi 
tion.  Lady  Graham  is  older  than  these;  while  Mrs.  Phipps  is 
younger.  These  two  were  only  inferior  in  beauty  to  Mrs. 
Norton  and  Lady  Seymour.  In  such  society  you  may  well  sup 
pose  the  hours  flew  on  rosy  pinions.  It  was  after  midnight 
when  we  separated/' 

In  the  same  vein  was  the  description  Sumner  gave  of  the 
speech  of  the  young  Queen  Victoria  at  the  opening  of  Parlia 
ment.  Through  the  kindness  of  Lord  Morpeth,  he  was  ac 
commodated  with  a  place  at  the  bar, — he  thought  it  the  best 
place  occupied  by  any  person  not  in  court  dress.  Prince  Louis 
Bonaparte  was  behind  him.  He  enjoyed  the  sight,  as  at  the 
coronation,  of  the  peeresses  as  they  took  their  seats  in  full 
dress,  resplendent  with  jewels  and  costly  ornaments.  The  room 
of  the  House  of  Lords  was  not  large  and  made  them  all  seem 
within  a  short  distance  of  him,  so  that  his  view  was  good. 

When  the  Queen  entered  with  the  crown,  which  seemed  too 
heavy  for  one  so  young,  on  her  head,  she  was  attended  by  the 


78  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

great  officers  of  state  and  there  were  great  guns  sounding  and 
trumpets  blowing,  which  added  to  the  scene/  She  took  her  seat 
with  quiet  dignity,  and  with  a  voice  not  audible  by  those  at  any 
distance  directed  the  House  of  Commons  to  be  summoned.  But 
she  retained  all  eyes ;  her  face  was  flushed  with  excitement,  her 
hands  moved  nervously  on  the  golden  arms  of  the  throne  and 
her  gloves  could  not  conceal  the  trembling  fingers.  She  was  a 
Queen,  but  her  little,  ill-suppressed  nervousness  showed  she  had 
still  the  heart  of  a  woman  and  vindicated  her  relationship  to  us 
all.  Yet  she  bore  herself  well — Simmer  thought  these  little 
things  were  not  noticeable  to  the  audience  generally,  and  they 
delighted  him  with  her  far  more  than  if  she  had  sat  as  if  cut 
in  alabaster. 

The  Commons  came  thundering  in  and  after  they  had  been 
seated  and  quiet  was  restored,  her  Majesty  commenced  reading 
her  speech,  which  the  Lord  Chancellor  had  handed  her.  At 
first  her  voice  was  inaudible.  It  was  not  till  she  wras  a  third 
through  that  she  spoke  sufficiently  loud  for  him  to  understand 
what  she  said.  But  after  that  every  word  came  to  him  in  such 
silvery  accents,  with  a  voice  so  sweet  and  finely  modulated, 
every  word  distinctly  pronounced  and  with  such  just  regard 
for  its  meaning,  that  Sumner  thought  he  had  never  heard  any 
thing  better  read  in  his  life.  After  it  was  over  he  could  but 
agree  with  Lord  Fitzwilliam's  ejaculation  to  him,  "  How  beau 
tifully  she  performs !  "  In  the  evening  the  House  of  Lords 
met  for  business  and  Sumner  heard  the  Lord  Chancellor  read 
the  speech  again  and  he  remarked  how  unlike  that  of  the  girl 
Queen  was  the  reading  of  her  Lord  Chancellor. 

As  Sumner's  stay  in  England  drew  to  a  close,  he  bade  good 
bye  to  many  pleasant  acquaintances  and  on  the  night  of  March 
twenty-second  crossed  the  English  Channel  to  Boulogne. 

During  his  travels  in  England  he  heard  some  estimates  of  his 
countrymen  which  he  records  as  mutually  interesting  to  them 
and  to  himself.  Sydney  Smith  wrote  him  that  he  had  a  great 
admiration  for  Americans,  that  he  was  pleased  with  their 
honesty,  simplicity  and  manliness  and  that  he  had  met  a  great 
number,  who  were  agreeable  and  enlightened.  Samuel  Rogers, 
the  poet,  in  speaking  of  them  to  an  English  friend,  admitted 
that  they  were  generally  very  agreeable  and  accomplished  men, 
but  insisted  that  there  was  too  much  of  them,  that  they  took 
up  too  much  of  the  time  of  the  English.  In  a  still  different 
vein  is  an  incident  that  Sumner  himself  met  with.  He  was  at 
a  dinner  with  Mr.  William  Theobald,  the  author  of  a  legal 
treatise  on  "  Principal  and  Surety  ",  where  he  was  invited  to 
meet  Eogers,  Kenyon,  Hayward,  Courtenay,  Mrs.  Shelley  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  79 

some  others.  Sumner  talked  a  good  deal  with  Mrs.  Shelley, 
whom  he  found  to  be  a  very  nice,  agreeable  person,  of  great 
cleverness.  She  said  that  the  greatest  happiness  of  a  woman 
was  to  be  the  wife  or  mother  of  a  distinguished  man.  But  what 
amused  Sumner  most  of  all,  was  an  expression  that  broke 
from  her  unawares.  They  were  speaking  of  travellers  who  vio 
lated  social  ties  and  published  personal  sketches,  when  forget 
ting  he  was  an  American,  she  broke  out :  "  Thank  God ! 
I  have  kept  clear  of  those  Americans."  Sumner  did  not  seem 
to  observe  what  she  said  and  she  soon  after  atoned  for  it. 

As  he  was  leaving  England  he  recorded  his  impressions  of  her 
people.  What  is  called  society  there  he  thought  was  better 
educated,  more  refined  and  more  civilized  than  what  is  called 
society  in  the  United  States.  He  insisted  that  what  he  called 
society  must  not  be  confounded  with  individuals,  that  he  knew 
persons  in  America,  who  would  be  an  ornament  to  any  circle, 
but  that  there  was  no  class  of  Americans  that  would  compare 
with  the  circle  which  constituted  English  society,  that  the  dif 
ference  in  education  in  England,  where  everybody  understood 
French  and  Latin  and  Greek,  was  very  much  against  the  Ameri 
cans.  He  thought  the  true  pride  of  America  was  in  her  mid 
dle  and  poorer  classes,  in  their  general  health  and  happiness, 
and  freedom  from  poverty;  in  their  opportunities  for  education 
and  for  rising  in  the  social  scale.  He  agreed  with  Charles 
Buller,  who  was  best  pleased  with  all  below  the  "  silk-stocking 
classes." 


CHAPTER  VIII 

TO  PARIS  AGAIN EMPLOYMENT  THERE NORTHEAST  BOUNDARY 

— JOURNEY  TO  ROME COMPANIONS HIS  FATHER'S  DEATH 

STUDIES GREENE,  CRAWFORD FLORENCE VENICE 

SUMNER  reached  Boulogne  on  the  morning  of  March  23, 
1839,  and  at  once  proceeded  by  coach  to  Paris.  On  the  road  he 
travelled  with  an  English  Member  of  Parliament,  who,  mis 
taking  him  for  an  Englishman,  talked  very  freely  about  the 
Americans.  Sumner,  with  sly  humor,  enjoyed  the  thrusts,  that 
were  being  made  at  his  countrymen,  and  forbore  to  correct 
him. 

He  remained  in  Paris  until  April  20th :  <e  I  am  here,"  he 
wrote,  "  simply  en  route  for  Italy ;  but  I  could  not  be  in  this 
charming  place  without  reviving  some  of  my  old  acquaintances, 
and  once  more  enjoying  the  splendid  museums  and  galleries 
and  sights."  He  attended  the  operas  and  theatres  and  revived 
his  recollections  of  the  beautiful  buildings  and  streets  by  re 
visiting  most  of  them.  One  day  he  passed  at  Versailles  where 
with  melancholy  interest  he  saw  the  exquisite  conception  of 
Joan  of  Arc,  sculptured  by  poor  Mary  of  Orleans,  whom  he  had 
seen  a  year  before,  a  bright,  beautiful  and  interesting  princess. 
Lord  Morpeth  had  commended  him  to  Lord  Granville,  the 
English  Minister  at  Paris,  by  whom  he  was  kindly  received. 
General  Cass,  our  Minister,  to  whom,  on  leaving  home,  it  will 
be  remembered  he  had  been  made  a  bearer  of  dispatches,  also 
showed  him  some  attentions.  Lord  Brougham  was  there.  He 
was  attached  to  Sumner,  as  Sumner  was  to  him,  and  many  were 
the  hours  they  passed  pleasantly  together.  Thorn's  balls  were 
then  among  the  great  attractions  in  Paris  and  invitations  were 
eagerly  sought.  It  illustrates  Sumner's  opportunities,  when 
Lord  Brougham  addressed  him  a  note  asking  Sumner  to  get 
him  an  invitation,  which  he  did. 

Sumner  found  some  serious  employment  to  occupy  him  dur 
ing  his  stay  in  Paris.  The  question  of  the  Northeastern 
Boundary,  between  Maine  and  Canada,  had  assumed  alarming 
proportions  and  threatened  war  between  the  United  States  and 
England.  The  trouble  arose  from  the  equivocal  marks  of  the 
original  surveys,  made  at  an  early  day  when  they  were  of  little 
importance.  It  was  finally  settled  by  the  Treaty  of  Washington, 

80 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  81 

negotiated  in  1842,  by  Mr.  Webster  and  Lord  Ashburton,  in 
which  the  original  lines  were  abandoned  and  an  arbitrary  one 
established  by  mutual  agreement.  When  Sumner  came  to  Paris 
there  was  a  feeling  with  General  Cass  and  the  members  of  his 
legation  that  the  American  argument  was  not  understood  in 
England  and  upon  the  Continent.  There  was  a  wish  to  have 
some  one  prepare  and  publish  a  careful  statement  of  it.  Gen 
eral  Cass  did  not  care  himself  to  undertake  this  and  others  to 
whom  application  was  made  declined  the  task.  The  choice 
finally  fell  on  Sumner  and  he  undertook  the  work. 

He  wrote  an  elaborate  article  that  was  published  in  "  Gal- 
ignani's  Messenger  ",  the  longest  ever  till  then  published  in 
that  journal.  It  had  a  circulation  of  eight  or  ten  thousand  on 
the  Continent  and  a  thousand  copies  were  ordered,  to  dis 
tribute  to  Members  of  the  English  Parliament.  Mr.  Hume, 
then  a  Member,  was  so  much  interested  in  the  article  that  he 
undertook  to  distribute  these  copies.  Sumner  also  wrote  about 
thirty  letters  on  the  subject  to  persons  of  prominence  in  Eng 
land,  of  his  acquaintance,  and  was  besides  able  to  interest  Lord 
Brougham. 

This  work  gained  Sumner  some  fame  at  home.  The  State  of 
Maine  had  originally  been  part  of  Massachusetts;  hence  her 
people  were  familiar  with  the  merits  of  the  controversy. 
Sumner's  article  was  reprinted  and  discussed  in  the  Boston 
papers  and  commented  on  among  public  men.  An  incident, 
connected  with  the  discussion,  threatened  an  interruption  of  the 
friendship  between  Sumner  and  Lord  Brougham.  Some  con 
versation  of  Sumner  with  one  Walsh,  in  Paris,  touching  the 
views  of  Lord  Brougham,  as  expressed  about  that  time  to 
Sumner,  were  misrepresented  and  were  printed  in  disparage 
ment  of  the  remarks  of  his  Lordship  in  the  House  of  Peers. 
Lord  Brougham  complained  of  this  to  Sumner,  who  promptly 
published  a  contradiction  of  Walsh's  article  and  condemned  it 
as  false.  This  was  entirely  satisfactory  to  Lord  Brougham  and 
the  affair  served  at  last  to  cement  their  friendship. 

Sumner  left  Paris  for  Lyons,  by  the  mail  coach  on  April 
twentieth  and,  after  a  short  rest  there,  travelled  on  in  the  same 
tedious  way  to  Marseilles.  He  embarked  there  for  Eome,  on 
May  third,  1839.  At  the  commencement  of  his  voyage,  he  fell 
in  with  three  young  Frenchmen  of  rank,  with  whom  he  travelled, 
not  without  profit  to  himself,  till  he  reached  Rome.  They 
placed  their  money  in  the  hands  of  one  of  their  number  to  pay 
their  bills.  Selected  probably  for  his  superior  thrift,  it  was  re 
markable  with  what  nicety  he  drove  their  joint  bargains,  aided 
by  the  humorous  but  shrewd  wisdom  of  his  companions.  They 


82  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

spoke  French  among  themselves.  This  was  an  advantage  to 
Sumner;  for  he  was  obliged  to  speak  it  too,  and  thus  revive  and 
extend  his  knowledge  of  the  language.  All  their  excursions,  at 
the  various  places  stopped  at,  along  the  road,  were  made  to 
gether; — together  they  passed  two  days  at  Genoa,  wandering 
among  its  palaces  and  groves  and  enjoying  its  paintings;  to 
gether  from  Leghorn  they  made  a  delightful  trip  to  Pisa, 
climbing  to  the  top  of  its  leaning  tower  and  admiring  the 
cathedral.  They  were  together  at  the  dirty  little  seaport, 
Civita  Vecchia,  and  at  the  beautiful  Bay  of  Naples,  "with  its 
waters  reflecting  the  blue  of  heaven  and  its  delicious  shores 
studded  with  historical  associations,"  together  they  went  to 
Pompeii,  treading  the  beautiful  mosaics;  and  together  they 
wondered  at  the  frescoes  and  marbles  of  its  houses,  and  strolling 
among  the  columns  and  arches  of  its  Forum,  they  asked  them 
selves  where,  among  living  cities,  could  such  things  be  found  as 
adorned  this  child  of  the  ages?  They  climbed  Vesuvius  and 
"  saw  the  furnace-like  fires  which  glowed  in  its  yawning  cracks 
and  seams."  They  visited  Capua,  "  shorn  of  all  its  soft  tempta 
tions  and  with  difficulty  found  a  breakfast  of  chocolate  and 
bread  where  Hannibal's  victorious  troops  wasted  with  luxury 
and  excess."  Thence  they  drove,  passing  over  the  Pontine 
Marshes  and  the  Alban  Hills,  to  Rome,  where  they  arrived  on 
the  twenty-first  of  May.  Here  they  separated. 

At  Rome  the  tidings  of  his  father's  death  reached  Sumner. 
He  died  on  April  twenty-fourth,  after  a  lingering  illness  of 
some  weeks,  sixty-three  years  of  age.  A  life  of  confinement, 
with  the  cares  of  a  large  family,  on  an  income  much  of  the  time 
small,  with  few  relaxations  and  no  considerable  success,  af 
flicted  by  poor  health,  towards  its  close,  had  rendered  him  cold 
and  cheerless  and  somewhat  rigid  and  exacting.  He  had  few  of 
the  traits  which  attract  the  hopeful  moods  of  the  young.  His 
life  could  furnish  little  to  satisfy  their  dreams  and  dazzling  am 
bitions.  He  had,  at  the  last,  too  little  sympathy  for  such  senti 
ments.  But  he  was  a  just  man,  scrupulously  honest,  in  every 
business  transaction.  A  tinge  of  suspicion  never  touched  his 
integrity.  Everything  he  did  was  with  the  greatest  exactness. 
Even  his  scholarship  was  of  this  character.  It  was  thorough 
and  systematic.  He  was  as  fearless  as  he  was  conscientious. 
There  must  be  no  shrinking  from  the  performance  of  any  duty. 
The  right  must  be  maintained  and  he  was  willing  to  be  first  to 
support  it.  But  it  would  be  asserted  without  unnecessary  rough 
ness;  for  he  was  always  a  gentleman  and  maintained  a  just  re 
gard  for  the  feelings  of  others.  Taken  for  all  in  all,  his  was  a 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  83 

careful,  painstaking,  conscientious  life,  with  little  in  it  for 
self. 

Sumner  in  childhood  had  been  repelled  by  his  father's  cheer 
less  moods.  As  he  grew  older  the  breach  seemed  to  widen  and 
after  his  admission  to  the  bar,  partly  in  consequence  of  this, 
he  did  not  live  at  home.  Yet  there  was  no  open  rupture,  only 
a  coldness  and  want  of  sympathy,  between  them.  Charles  was 
obedient  and  a  son  in  whom  the  father  had  sufficient  cause  for 
pride.  But  his  aspirations  were  high — higher  probably  than 
the  father  thought  time  would  justify.  He  saw  life  more  so 
berly.  The  father  did  not  approve  his  trip  abroad  and  did  not 
aid  it.  On  leaving  for  Europe,  Charles  had  remonstrated  with 
his  father,  against  his  strictness  with  his  children,  and  urged 
him  to  give  greater  opportunities,  than  he  was,  to  those  that  re 
mained  at.home.  The  suggestion  was  not  kindly  received.  While 
he  was  in  Europe,  his  brother  Henry  had  been  made  deputy- 
sheriff,  by  the  father's  appointment,  and  Charles  expressed  his 
regret,  wishing  something  better  for  his  younger  brother. 
The  circumstance  was  irritating  to  the  father,  in  his  condition 
of  health.  Charles  wrote  once  to  him,  from  Europe,  but  his 
letter  was  not  answered  and  he  did  not  write  again.  Consider 
ing  his"  toils  and  sacrifices,  the  father  probably  felt  that  these 
apparent  criticisms  were  unjust  to  him.  Coming  under  such 
circumstances,  his  father's  death  was  peculiarly  sad  to  Charles. 
It  grew  sadder  with  his  years.  The  traits  that  before  repelled 
him  dwindled  in  importance  and  the  real  merit  of  the  father 
grew  upon  him.  He  felt  that  he  had  not  given  him  the  con 
sideration  he  deserved. 

And  how  often  it  is  that  death  brings  unavailingly  back  to 
our  remembrance  kind  words  that  might  have  been  spoken  but 
were  not.  Charles  thought  that  it  would  have  gladdened  the 
heart  of  the  father  to  know  that  the  best  he  could  do,  striven 
for  manfully,  was  at  least  understood  and  appreciated  in  the 
spirit  it  was  done, — that  it  would  have  soothed  his  last  hours, 
with  life  all  behind,  reflecting  on  its  trials  and  its  sacrifices,  to 
know,  ere  he  went  away,  that  those  nearest  to  him  felt  the 
worth  of  the  long  days'  work ;  and  that  it  was  not  thrust  aside 
and  overlooked,  in  the  wish  for  something  more  that  he  had  not 
been  able  to  do. 

He  was  cast  down  by  the  news.  But  the  friends  at  home, 
in  the  same  letters  that  conveyed  the  intelligence  of  his  father's 
death,  urged  him  to  let  it  make  no  change  in  his  plans.  The 
father  had  always  managed  his  business  and  property  with  such 
care,  that  there  was  really  little  for  any  one  to  do,  in  settling 
up  his  affairs.  The  education  of  his  younger  brothers  and  sis- 


84  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ters  was  a  matter  of  more  concern  to  him.  But  he  reflected 
that  his  mother  was  there  and  that  her  good  judgment,  aided 
by  the  advice  of  friends,  would  accomplish  all  that  he  could 
hope  to  do.  She  knew  his  wishes.  So  he  concluded  to  follow 
the  advice  given  him  and  finish  his  trip  according  to  his  orig 
inal  plan. 

He  spent  the  summer  in  Rome,  remaining  there  until  the 
middle  of  August.  His  time  was  employed  differently  from 
what  it  had  been  in  England,  where  he  had  devoted  most  of  it 
to  making  acquaintances,  seeing  society,  the  courts,  cathedrals 
and  universities  and  great  country  seats.  In  Rome  many  of  his 
letters  of  introduction  were  unused,  he  saw  little  of  society  and 
had  only  a  few  friends.  George  W.  Greene,  the  U.  S.  Consul 
at  Rome,  was  one  of  them. 

"  My  habits,"  he  wrote,  "  were  simple.  Rose  at  half-past  six 
o'clock,  threw  myself  on  my  sofa,  with  a  little  round  table  near, 
well  covered  with  books,  read  undisturbed  till  about  ten,  when 
the  servant  brought,  on  a  tray,  my  breakfast, — two  eggs  done 
sur  le  plat,  a  roll  and  a  cup  of  chocolate ;  some  of  the  books  were 
pushed  aside  enough  to  give  momentary  place  to  the  tray. 
The  breakfast  was  concluded  without  quitting  the  sofa;  rang 
the  bell  and  my  table  was  put  to  rights,  and  my  readiirg  went 
on  till  five  or  six  o'clock  in  the  evening,  without  my  once  rising 
from  the  sofa.  At  five  or  six,  got  up,  stretched  myself  and 
dressed  to  go  out;  dined  in  a  garden  under  a  mulberry  tree, 
chiefly  on  fruits,  salads  and  wines,  with  the  occasional  injec 
tion  of  a  soup  or  steak ;  the  fruits  were  apricots,  green  almonds 
and  figs;  the  salads,  those  of  the  exception  under  the  second 
declension  of  nouns  in  our  old  Latin  Grammar;  the  wines,  the 
light,  cooling,  delicious  product  of  the  country.  By  this  time 
Greene  came  to  me, — in  accomplishments  and  attainments  our 
country  has  not  five  men  his  peers, — and  we  walked  to  the 
Forum  or  to  San  Pietro,  or  out  of  one  of  the  gates  of  Rome. 
Many  an  hour  have  we  sat  upon  a  broken  column  or  a  rich  cap 
ital,  in  the  Via  Sacra  or  the  Colosseum,  and  called  to  mind  what 
has  passed  before  them,  weaving  out  the  web  of  the  story  they 
might  tell ;  and  then  leaping  centuries  and  seas,  we  have  joined 
our  friends  at  home  and,  with  them,  shared  our  pleasures.  Af 
ter  an  ice-cream,  we  parted ;  I  to  my  books  again ;  or  sometimes 
with  him  to  his  house  where,  over  a  supper,  not  unlike  the  din 
ner  I  have  described,  we  continued  the  topics  of  our  walk.  This 
was  my  day's  round,  after  I  had  seen  the  chief  of  those  things 
in  Rome  that  require  midday,  so  that  I  was  able  to  keep  the 
house." 

Sumner  revived  his  knowledge  of  Latin.     But  the  acquisi- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  85 

tion  of  the  Italian  was  the  primary  object  and  it  was  to  th 
that  he  devoted  himself  with  such  diligence.  He  soon  acquire- 
it.  Before  he  left  Italy,  he  had  read  the  most  famous  works  01 
the  language  in  the  original.  This  was  a  great  source  of  pleas 
ure  to  him.  However  faithful  a  translation  may  be,  there  is 
always  much  of  the  beauty  of  the  original  lost  to  one  who  can 
not  read  the  work  in  the  language  the  author  left  it.  He  also 
learned  to  talk  the  language;  so  he  could  understand  all  that 
was  said  to  him  in  a  conversation  and  likewise  make  himself 
understood.  The  fellow  travellers  he  met  and  the  servants  in 
the  hotels  where  he  stopped,  after  leaving  Kome,  used  the  lan 
guage  with  him,  instead  of  French,  the  common  one  among 
strangers,  thus  unintentionally  complimenting  his  Italian.  He 
always  maintained  his  familiarity  with  French  and  Italian  and 
made  frequent  use  of  both  in  later  life. 

Among  the  artists  he  met  in  Rome,  and  the  one  to  whom  he 
became  most  attached  was  Thomas  Crawford,  a  native  of  New 
York.  He  was  then  obscure  and  unknown  to  fame,  struggling 
for  perfection  and  recognition  in  his  chosen  profession.  He 
was  a  man  of  talent  and  industry  and  became  one  of  the  famous 
American  artists.  He  designed  and  executed  the  statue  of 
Liberty  that  crowns  the  dome  of  the  National  Capitol  at  Wash 
ington  and  the  equestrian  statue  of  Washington  on  the  State 
House  grounds  in  Richmond,  Va.  He  was  then  poor  and 
down-hearted  and  dispirited,  at  his  want  of  success.  Sumner, 
with  his  quick  appreciation  for  struggling  merit,  became  his 
enthusiastic  friend,  encouraged  him  to  go  on  and  sought  by 
every  means  to  secure  for  him  the  recognition  he  deserved.  He 
praised  his  work,  gave  him  an  order  for  a  bust  of  himself  and 
wrote  enthusiastically  of  him  to  Hillard  and  other  friends  at 
home,  urging  them  to  try  to  secure  orders  for  him.  Orders 
did  come  afterwards  in  abundance;  and  when  Sumner  visited 
Europe  again  in  1857,  he  found  Crawford  in  the  full  realiza 
tion  of  fame,  but,  as  sometimes  happens,  too  sick  to  enjoy  it. 
He  was  fading  away,  in  the  blight  of  a  slow  disease,  and  died  a 
few  months  later,  at  the  age  of  forty-four,  his  life  probably 
shortened,  and  his  career  ended  too  soon,  by  early  disappoint 
ments. 

Among  Sumner's  pleasant  experiences  at  Rome,  was  an  ex 
cursion  he  made  with  his  friend  Greene  to  the  convent  of 
Palazzuola,  situated  on  the  site  of  Alba  Longa,  amid  precipices 
and  impenetrable  forests,  overlooking  the  beautiful  Alban  Lake. 
Its  situation  was  so  inaccessible  that  no  vehicle  could  approach 
within  two  miles  of  it.  It  was  a  delightful  refreshment  dur 
ing  the  heated  season  of  the  year  to  lounge  in  its  spacious  halls, 


86  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to  wander  in  the  shade  of  its  rocks  and  trees  and  to  bathe  in  the 
waters  of  its  lake.  They  remained  here  several  days,  having 
had  assigned  to  them  three  apartments  each,  a  bedroom,,  a 
cabinet  and  an  antechamber.  Simmer's  antechamber  was 
vaulted  and  covered  with  arabesques.  The  arched  ceilings  and 
the  walls  of  the  other  two  rooms  were  painted  so  as  to  resemble 
the  stone  walls  of  a  hermit's  cell,  while  at  the  post  of  his  bed, 
hung  the  beads  and  the  crucifix  of  a  monk.  The  library  of  the 
monastery  contained  about  a  thousand  volumes  in  Latin  and 
Italian,  all  ancient  works  in  parchment.  To  examine  such  a 
library  was  a  treat  to  the  lover  of  curious  books.  Sumner  took 
them  down  one  by  one,  some  of  them  he  found  bottom  upwards 
and  apparently  with  the  dust  of  centuries  upon  them.  The 
librarian  told  him  there  were  no  manuscripts  but  he  found 
more  than  a  dozen.  The  standard  work  on  geography  repre 
sented  England  as  composed  of  seven  kingdoms.  America  as 
belonging  to  Spain,  with  Boston  as  the  capital  and  Vera  Cruz 
as  the  chief  commercial  centre. 

The  convent  belonged  to  monks  of  the  Franciscan  order,  one 
of  the  most  rigid  of  the  Roman  Church.  They  wore  neither 
hats  nor  stockings  and  only  sandals  on  their  feet.  The  rest  of 
their  dress  consisted  of  a  coarse  woollen  cloak  or  robe.  They 
subsisted  by  charity.  "  One  of  their  number,"  Sumner  wrote, 
"  lately  was  begging  for  corn  of  a  farmer,  who  was  treading 
out  with  oxen  the  summer's  harvest.  The  farmer  in  derision, 
and  as  a  way  of  refusing,  pointed  to  a  bag,  which  contained  a 
load  for  three  men  and  told  the  monk  he  was  welcome  to  that 
if  he  would  carry  it  off.  The  monk  invoked  St.  Francis,  stooped 
and  took  up  the  load  and  quietly  carried  it  away.  The  aston 
ished  farmer  followed  him  to  the  convent  and  required  the  re 
turn  of  his  corn.  His  faith  was  not  great  enough  to  see  the 
miracle.  It  was  given  up  but,  the  story  coming  to  the  ears  of 
the  governor  of  the  town,  he  summarily  ordered  the  restoration 
of  the  corn  to  the  convent." 

The  time  Sumner  had  allowed  for  his  stay  in  Rome  passed 
quickly.  His  days  were  absorbed  with  study  and  his  evenings 
with  one  or  two  congenial  frien'ds.  The  middays  on  account 
of  their  heat  at  this  season  were  not  the  best  for  sight-seeing; 
but  the  mornings  and  evenings  sufficed.  Removed  from  care, 
absorbed  with  books  and  friends,  sweet  peaceful  days, — he 
always  remembered  those  three  months  in  Rome  as  one  of  the 
delightful  periods  of  his  life. 

From  Rome  he  went  to  Florence,  passing  four  days  and  a 
half  on  the  road,  a  journey  now  with  the  aid  of  railroads  easily 
made  in  an  afternoon.  But  then  it  was  made  by  coach.  Among 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  87 

his  travelling  companions  was  Signor  Ottavio  Gigli,  with  whom 
he  became  well  acquainted.  He  was  a  young  scholar,  of  about 
Simmer's  age,  engaged  in  literary  pursuits  and  well  acquainted 
in  Rome  and  Florence.  At  the  latter  place  he  introduced 
Sumner  to  several  authors  of  note.  The  friend  in  Florence, 
whom  Sumner  most  enjoyed  was  Horatio  Greenough,  an  Ameri 
can  sculptor,  then  in  the  full  tide  of  his  career.  He  was  en 
gaged  upon  a  statue  of  Washington  and  a  bas-relief,  "  The 
Rescue ",  both  for  the  Capitol.  Sumner  admired  both,  es 
pecially  the  latter. 

"  It  is  intended  to  represent,"  he  wrote,  "  the  surprise  of  a 
white  settlement  by  the  Indians.  On  the  ground  is  a  mother 
clasping  her  child,  in  order  to  save  it  from  the  uplifted  toma 
hawk  of  an  Indian  who  stands  over  her,  but  whose  hand  is 
arrested,  by  a  fearless  settler,  who  is  represented  on  a  rock, 
so  that  the  upper  half  of  his  body  appears  above  the  Indian.  *  * 
The  woman  is  on  the  ground,  so  that  she  does  not  conceal  the 
Indian,  who  is  naked,  except  an  accidental  fold  about  his  loins, 
and  the  settler,  who  appears  above  the  savage,  restraining  his 
fury,  is  dressed  in  a  hunter's  shirt  and  cap.  The  passions  are 
various, — the  child,  the  mother,  the  father,  the  husband,  the 
savage,  the  defender,  etc.;  all  the  various  characters  being 
blended  in  the  group."  The  piece  as  completed  now  adorns  the 
east  front  of  the  Capitol  at  Washington. 

Sumner  ranked  Greenough  as  a  man  of  eminence  in  his  pro 
fession,  superior  to  any  other  artist  then  living.  He  was  a  man 
of  infinite  pains.  His  "  Washington  "  was  on  his  hands  eight 
years  and  "  The  Rescue "  fourteen.  "  They  build  for  im 
mortality/'  Sumner  wrote  <(  who  calmly  dedicate  to  a  work  so 
much  time."  Sumner  also  met  Powers,  another  American 
sculptor,  at  Florence,  and  spent  some  time  at  his  studio.  He 
did  not,  however,  admire  his  work  so  much.  But  wherever  he 
went,  his  heart  still  turned  to  Crawford.  He  sought  to  interest 
others  in  him.  At  his  solicitation,  Gigli  promised  to  visit  him 
and  write  of  his  work,  in  some  Italian  journals. 

From  Florence,  Sumner  went  to  Venice,  stopping  by  the 
way  successively  at  Bologna,  Ferrara,  Rovigo  and  Padua.  At 
Venice,  he  spent  a  week,  plying  her  watery  ways,  while  the 
gondoliers  timed  the  strokes  of  their  oars  to  the  music  of  their 
songs.  As  he  stepped  into  his  boat  one  day  a  little  boy  asked 
him  if  he  should  not  go  along  and  sing  Tasso.  It  was  an  en 
chanting  place  and  he  gave  himself  up  to  the  enjoyment  of  it. 
He  attended  the  theatres  and  operas  and  strolled  under  the  ar 
cades  of  the  great  Piazza.  He  had  brought  letters  to  some  of 
the  influential  people  but  they  were  left  undisturbed  in  his  port- 


88  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

folio.  His  time  was  too  short  and  the  beauties  of  the  ancient 
and  decaying  capital  too  attractive  to  neglect  them,  for  the  ac 
quaintance  of  an  hour. 

He  left  Venice  on  the  thirtieth  of  September,  1839,  for  Milan, 
passing  on  the  way  through  Padua,  Verona,  Brescia  and  Ber 
gamo,  travelling  by  coach  two  nights  and  a  day.  The  first 
.part  of  the  journey  was  through  a  blinding  rain.  "All  that 
night,"  he  wrote,  "  we  rode  in  the  midst  of  a  tremendous 
storm.  It  is  exciting  to  rattle  over  the  pavements  of  villages, 
towns  and  cities  in  the  dead  of  nights;  to  catch,  perhaps,  a 
solitary  light  shining  from  the  room  of  some  watcher,  Mike 
a  good  deed  in  a  naughty  world ; ?  and  when  you  arrive  at  the 
gates  of  a  city,  the  postilion  winds  his  horn,  and  the  heavy 
portals  are  swung  open,  it  seems  like  a  vision  of  romance.  Nor 
is  it  less  exciting  in  earlier  evening,  when  the  shops  and  streets 
are  bright  with  light,  and  people  throng  the  streets,  to  dash 
along."  Sumner  had  tasked  himself,  while  in  Italy  to  six 
hours'  study  of  the  language  each  day  and  he  continued  it 
through  his  days  of  journeying.  If  his  companions  were  weary 
or  tedious,  or  the  scenery  uninteresting,  his  book  was  at  hand 
and  he  turned  to  it.  He  was  ready  to  lay  it  aside  when  any 
thing  of  interest  appeared. 

It  is  curious  to  note  the  books  he  read  while  in  Italy. 
"  Dante,"  Tasso's  "  Gerusalemme,"  Boccaccio's  "  Decameron/' 
Politian's  "  Rime,"  the  tragedies  of  Alfieri,  the  principal 
dramas  of  Metastasio,  Lanzi's  "  Stonia  Pittorica,"  Machiavelli's 
"Principe",  Tasso's  "  Aminta ",  Guarini's  "Pastor  Fido ", 
some  of  Monti,  of  Pindemonte,  of  Parini,  Botta's  histories, 
Boccrescio's  "  Corbaccio  "  and  "  Fiammetta  ".  These  were  read 
before  he  left  Rome.  After  that  he  read :  Manzoni's  "  Promissi 
Sposi ",  Petrarch's  "  Rime  ",  Ariosto,  all  of  Machiavelli  except 
his  tract  on  "  War  ",  Guicciardini's  "  Storia  ",  Manzoni's  trag 
edies  and  "  Rime  ",  the  principal  plays  of  Niccolini,  Nota  and 
Goldoni,  the  autobiography  of  Alfieri.  Besides  this  he  read  the 
newspapers,  American,  English,  French  and  Italian  that  came 
in  his  way. 

Sumner  reached  Milan  on  the  morning  of  October  second  and 
remained  there  until  the  sixth.  At  noon  of  that  day,  Sunday, 
he  left  by  the  mail  coach  for  Munich,  going  by  way  of  the 
Stelvio  Pass,  over  the  Alps  to  Innsbruck.  A  friend  whose  ac 
quaintance  he  made  in  Milan  offered  him  a  seat  in  his  private 
carriage,  for  the  journey  to  Munich,  a  distance  of  about  five 
hundred  miles,  but  he  put  aside  the  tempting  offer  and  chose 
instead  the  slower  and  less  luxurious  public  conveyance  that  he 
might  mingle  more  with  people  along  the  road  and  pick  up  their 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  89 

language  and  customs.  The  road  led  him  through  the  mag 
nificent  scenery  of  the  Alps,  surpassing  any  he  had  seen  before. 
It  lay  through  the  region  of  the  glaciers  and  perpetual  snow. 
At  midnight  they  halted  for  a  little  sleep  at  Santa  Maria,  a 
thousand  feet  below  the  summit.  Though  twelve  hours  before 
he  had  left  the  plains  of  Lombardy,  glowing  with  the  warmth 
and  sunshine  of  a  beautiful  autumn  day,  he  slept  that  night, 
amid  sharp  winter,  in  an  inn,  with  double  windows,  under 
heavy  coverings  on  his  bed,  to  which  he  added  the  weight  of  his 
cloak.  And  yet  he  was  so  bitter  cold,  that  before  morning  he 
was  glad  to  warm  himself,  by  ascending  the  mountain  on  foot. 
He  reached  the  highest  point,  eight  thousand  nine  hundred 
feet  above  the  sea,  and  crossed  the  Italian  boundary  just  as  the 
morning  sun  was  gilding  the  tops  of  the  mountains. 

It  was  here,  with  dazzling  glaciers  near,  that  he  bade  fare 
well  to  Italy.  The  boundary  was  marked  by  a  column,  inscribed 
on  one  side  "  Eegno  Lombardo  ",  on  the  other  "  Tyrolese  Aus 
tria  ".  He  had  passed  it  some  distance  when  the  thought  came 
to  his  mind  that  he  was  leaving  Italy;  he  hurried  back  to  the 
border  line,  "looked  in  vain  for  those  beautiful  fields  which 
seemed  Elysian"  to  memory,  said  to  himself  that  he  should 
never  see  them  again  and  taking  off  his  hat  made  a  last  salute. 
His  sole  companion  was  "  an  elderly,  learned,  lean,  pragmatical 
German  ".  He  heard  his  parting  words  and  at  once  turned  in 
the  contrary  direction  and  doffing  his  straw  hat  that  covered  his 
head,  ejaculated ;  "  Et  moi  je  salue  1'Allemagne." 

u  And  yet,"  Sumner  wrote  to  Greene,  "  I  must  again  go  to 
Italy.  Have  I  left  it  forever?  How  charming  it  seems  in  my 
mind's  eye !  Pictures,  statues,  poetry,  all  come  across  my  soul 
with  ravishing  power.  Where  do  these  words  come  from? 
They  are  of  the  thousand  verses  that  are  hymning  through  my 
mind  with  a  music  like  that  of  the  ( Dorian  flutes  and  soft 
recorders'.  All  this  is  your  heritage;  to  me  is  unchanging 
drudgery,  where  there  are  no  flowers  to  pluck  by  the  wayside, 
no  green  sprigs,  fresh  myrtle,  hanging  vines, — but  the  great 
grindstone  of  the  law.  There  I  must  work.  Sisyphus  '  rolled 
the  rock  reluctant  up  the  hill ',  and  I  am  going  home  to  do  the 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE     JOURNEY     THROUGH     AUSTRIA VIENNA METTERNICH 

BERLIN SAVIGNY HEIDELBERG,     MITTERMAIER,     THIBAUT 

—LONDON  AGAIN HOME RETROSPECT  OF  TRIP 

SUMNER  turned  his  face  to  the  North.  The  prim  little  vil 
lages  of  the  Tyrol,  nestling  among  spurs  of  the  Alps,  with  an 
air  of  antiquity  about  them,  as  his  coach  descended  the  mount 
ains  and  whirled  through  them,  looked  like  pictures  of  happy 
homelife.  Nothing  could  be  cleaner.  Groups  of  happy  children 
played  in  their  streets,  contented  old  men  sat,  in  the  peaceful 
autumn  days,  by  the  cottage  doors.  Laughing  girls  with  fresh, 
German  complexions  and  comely  figures  stole  quiet  glances  at 
the  strangers.  At  one  of  the  stops  of  the  coach,  a  fair  Tyrolese, 
a  little  more  daring  and  perhaps  more  fun-loving  than  the 
others,  invited  Sumner,  through  an  interpreter,  to  waltz  with 
her,  to  the  music  of  some  wandering  Hungarians.  Whether  he 
accepted  her  challenge,  he  did  not  record.  Perhaps  not  know 
ing  how  to  waltz,  he  put  it  so,  being  too  chivalrous  to  say  that 
he  declined. 

He  reached  Innsbruck,  Wednesday  morning  at  ten  o'clock, 
having  spent  three  days  and  three  nights  on  the  journey  from 
Milan.  During  this  time  he  slept  only  three  hours  and  a  half 
out  of  the  coach.  He  passed  a  day  at  Innsbruck  and  then 
journeyed  on  by  the  mail-coach  a  day  and  a  half  to  Munich. 
Here  he  spent  a  week.  A  lady  of  his  acquaintance  from  Bos 
ton  was  there.  Sumner  remarked  that  she  was  all  French  in 
her  affectations  and  aped  Continental  ways  in  her  dress  and 
manners,  particularly  in  her  hair.  She  appeared  at  table  in 
the  dress  of  a  dinner  party  making  a  contrast  with  the  simple 
costume  of  some  English  gentlefolks  who  were  there,  among 
them  Disraeli  and  his  wife.  The  conversation  had  turned  to 
"  Vivian  Grey  ",  when  she  remarked,  "  There  is  a  great  deal 
written  in  the  garrets  of  London."  "  I  assure  you,"  answered 
Disraeli,  "  l  Vivian  Grey  '  was  not  written  in  a  garret." 

Sumner  enjoyed  Munich.  He  visited  the  king's  gallery  of 
sculpture  and  also  sought  out  the  paintings  and  frescoes  upon 
which  the  city  prided  itself.  One  of  the  large  frescoes  by 
Cornelius  represented  Orpheus  begging  Eurydice  of  Plato.  The 
group,  especially  the  representation  of  Cerberus,  impressed 

90 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  91 

Sumner  as  admirable.  Knowing  that  Crawford  was  modelling 
an  *'  Orpheus  ",  he  sent  him  a  careful  description  of  this  fresco 
thinking  it  might  furnish  him  some  suggestions.  Sumner  had 
predicted  that  if  Crawford  completed  his  "  Orpheus  "  as  com 
menced  it  would  be  one  of  the  best  works  of  modern  times.  It 
was  completed  and  Simmer's  prediction  has  been  verified.  Af 
ter  its  completion  Sumner  raised  a  subscription  to  procure  a 
marble  copy  of  it  from  Crawford  to  be  placed  in  the  city  of 
Boston.  But  of  this  mention  will  be  made  in  a  future  connec 
tion. 

Sumner  left  Munich  on  the  twentieth  of  October.  Another 
day  and  night  in  the  stage  brought  him  to  Passau.  With  an 
English  friend,  he  here  hired  a  little  gondola  and  in  it  they 
dropped  gently  down  the  Danube,  with  the  current,  seventy 
miles  to  the  city  of  Linz.  The  delightful  ride,  on  the  smooth 
gliding  surface  of  the  river,  between  banks  at  every  turn  open 
ing  up  beautiful  scenery,  was  a  grateful  respite  from  the  dusty 
jolting  of  the  coach.  At  Linz,  they  hired  a  carriage  and  in  two 
days  and  a  half,  on  the  twenty-fifth  day  of  October,  1839,  they 
entered  Vienna. 

Sumner  remained  in  Vienna  a  month,  occupied,  most  of  his 
time,  in  seeing  the  city  and  in  studying  the  language.  He  went 
little  into  society  and  made  few  acquaintances.  He  was,  how 
ever,  invited  by  Prince  Metternich,  then  First  Minister  of 
Austria,  to  a  reception  at  his  palace.  This  he  attended  and 
was  received  with  consideration.  The  Prince  inquired  particu 
larly  about  America  and  showed  much  interest  in  the  country. 
He  asked  if  he  knew  the  Austrian  Minister  and  requested  Sum 
ner  to  call  upon  him  when  in  Washington. 

The  Prince  was  of  a  noble  family  and  in  early  life  repre 
sented  his  country  as  Ambassador  at  Paris,  where  he  met  the 
Emperor  Napoleon.  He  became  his  warm  admirer.  Soon  af 
ter  his  return  from  Paris  he  was  made  First  Minister,  and  after 
,  the  battle  of  Wagram  he  showed  his  capacity  for  management 
by  bringing  about  the  marriage  of  Napoleon  to  Marie  Louise. 
He  continued  in  office  till  1848  and  then  resigned.  When  Sum 
ner  met  him  he  was  still  in  his  prime,  a  large,  fine-looking  man 
and  very  affable. 

With  the  kindness  of  some  other  friends  and  the  favor  of  the 
Prince,  Sumner  felt  the  way  was  open  for  him  to  see  much  of 
society  in  Vienna.  It  was  then  the  "  most  select  home  of 
aristocracy ".  But  he  left  the  city  almost  immediately.  A 
night  and  a  day  of  dismal  riding  brought  him  to  Prague.  Here 
he  viewed  its  famous  bridge  and  tower  and  the  palace  of  its 
kings.  Then  another  day  and  night  brought  him  to  Dresden, 


92  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

where  the  beautiful  paintings  reminded  him  of  Italy.  From 
Dresden  to  Leipsic  he  travelled  by  railroad,  the  only  travelling 
he  did  in  this  way  while  in  Europe.  One  of  the  railway  car 
riages  was  named  t(  Washington  ", — a  name,  he  remarked,  that 
seemed  to  have  a  charm  about  it,  wherever  he  went.  Irving, 
when  travelling  -upon  the  Continent,  noticed  on  one  occasion, 
that  he  was  received  as  a  person  of  no  consequence,  until  his 
host  discovered  that  his  first  name  was  "  Washington  ",  when 
inferring,  from  this  circumstance,  that  he  bore  some  relation 
ship  to  the  Father  of  his  Country,  he  was  thenceforth  treated 
with  marked  consideration. 

Another  day  and  night  from  Leipsic  brought  Sumner  to 
Berlin,  where  he  remained  until  January  ninth,  1840.  Theo 
dore  S.  Fay  was  then  Secretary  of  Legation  from  the  United 
States  at  Berlin.  He  was  a  young  man  near  Sumner's  age, 
quiet  and  unassuming  in  deportment,  and  of  a  lovable  disposi 
tion.  He  was  possessed  of  some  literary  ability  and  the  author 
of  several  volumes,  one  of  which  he  then  had  in  press.  Between 
Sumner  and  Fay  there  grew  up  a  lasting  friendship.  It  was 
useful  to  Sumner  during  his  month's  stay  in  Berlin,  for  Fay 
had  access  to  the  best  circles  of  the  Prussian  capital.  He  in 
troduced  Sumner  both  at  Court  and  to  the  Professors  of  the 
university  and  thus  his  stay  was  made  profitable  and  pleasant. 

In  a  few  weeks  Sumner  could  write :  "  I  know  everybody,  and 
am  engaged  every  day."  He  had  seen  all  the  distinguished 
Professors  and  had  received  some  of  them  in  his  room.  He 
knew  Raumer  and  Ranke,  the  historians;  of  these  he  preferred 
Ranke,  who  had  the  most  vivacity,  humor  and,  as  Sumner 
thought,  genius.  His  "  History  of  the  Popes "  was  widely 
known  and  read  and  was  being  translated  into  English.  Alex 
ander  von  Humboldt,  then  engaged  upon  his  "  Cosmos  ",  re 
ceived  him  kindly.  He  was  the  reputed  head  of  conversers  in 
Germany  and  in  this  respect  Sumner  described  him  to  his 
friends  as,  like  Judge  Story,  "  rapid,  continuous,  unflagging, 
lively,  various  ".  He  had  read  Prescott's  "  Ferdinand  and  Isa 
bella  "  and  he  and  Ranke  both  spoke  in  the  highest  terms  of  it 
to  Sumner.  Humboldt  was  also  an  admirer  of  Edward  Everett 
of  Boston. 

But  the  Professor,  in  the  university,  of  whom  Sumner  gave 
the  fullest  description  was  Savigny.  Sumner's  still  nourished 
ambition  for  a  career  in  the  Harvard  Law  School,  would  make 
this  natural.  Savigny  was,  at  this  time,  at  the  head  of  the 
law  department  of  the  University  of  Berlin  and  Sumner  con 
sidered  him,  by  common  consent,  the  leading  authority  on  juris 
prudence  in  Germany  and,  in  truth,  upon  the  whole  Continent. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  93 

He  was  of  noble  birth  and  from  early  manhood  had  been  a 
Professor  of  Law  in  various  universities.  From  1842  to  1848 
he  was  Minister  of  Justice  of  the  Empire.  But  his  title  to 
fame  rests  principally  on  his  published  works,  particularly  his 
work  "  On  Obligations  ". 

In  personal  appearance  and  manner  Sumner  thought  he  re 
sembled  Webster,  more  than  any  person  he  had  ever  seen.  He 
was  taller  and  not  quite  so  stout,  but  there  was  the  same  dark 
face  and  hair  and  eyes;  as  he  sat  by  Sumner  and  he  caught 
his  voice,  he  was  startled  by  the  resemblance  to  the  Massachu 
setts  Senator's.  Savigny  and  Humbolclt  belonged  to  the  society 
of  Berlin,  and  were  sought  for,  in  the  court  and  diplomatic 
circles,  a  distinction  the  other  professors  did  not  enjoy. 

Sumner  had  looked  forward  to  an  acquaintance  with  Savigny. 
He  was  one  of  the  European  authorities  upon  the  question  of 
codification.  More  than  twenty  years  before  he  had  published 
a  reply  to  Thibaut's  argument  in  favor  of  a  code.  In  Paris, 
Sumner  was  told,  that  he  had  modified  his  views  upon  this  sub 
ject,  but  when  he  came  to  converse  with  him  he  was  sorry  to 
find  that  his  informants  were  mistaken.  He  was  as  firm  as 
ever  in  his  opposition  to  codes.  He  listened  kindly  to  Sumner's 
views  on  the  subject,  but  when  done,  seemed  unshaken  in  his 
own  conclusions.  He  had  read  Judge  Story's  work  on  the 
"  Conflict  of  Laws  "  and  expressed  his  surprise  that  he  was  not 
on  the  Massachusetts  committee  to  codify  the  Criminal  Law, 
not  reflecting  that  his  other  more  important  duties  would  pre 
vent  him  from  taking  an  appointment  that  would  involve  so 
much  labor.  • 

Through  the  kind  offices  of  his  friend  Fay,  Sumner  met  most 
of  the  foreign  Ministers  resident  at  Berlin  and  the  diplomatic 
corps.  He  was  kindly  received  by  the  Crown  Prince  and  Prince 
William,  both  of  whom  became  Emperors  of  Prussia,  and  their 
princesses.  The  Crown  Prince  seemed  very  cordial  and  in 
quired  about  the  summers  of  New  England  and  thought  they 
must  be  magnificent.  Sumner  answered  that  he  had  thought 
so  too,  till  he  had  been  in  Italy.  But  after  all,  Eanke,  Hum- 
boldt,  Savigny,  great  names  still  among  the  Germans,  the  ele 
gant  historian  of  the  Popes,  the  author  of  Cosmos  and  the  mas 
ter  of  German  jurisprudence, — these  were  the  men  Sumner 
admired  !  He  knew  them  all ! 

From  Berlin  Sumner  went  to  Leipsic,  Weimar,  Gotha, 
Frankfort  and  then  to  Heidelberg.  He  remained  five  weeks  at 
Heidelberg,  studying,  reading  and  talking  German.  He  en 
joyed  the  ancient  town  beautifully  located  on  the  river  Neckar, 
in  the  province  of  Baden,  noted  for  its  castle,  the  largest  in 


94  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Germany,  falling  into  decay,  but  rendered  more  attractive  by 
the  tints  of  its  fading  glory,  and  for  its  university,  the  oldest 
in  Germany,  founded  in  1356,  a  worthy  rival  of  that  of  Berlin. 
It  had  a  greater  reputation  abroad,  owing  to  the  foreign  stu 
dents,  who  were  attracted  in  great  numbers  to  it,  by  the  cheap 
ness  of  living.  Sumner  humorously  wrote  that  he  had  a  hun 
dred  dollars  and  doubted  not  he  was  the  richest  person  in  the 
place.  Professor  Thibaut  called  him  their  ff  grand  seigneur/' 

Sumner  always  felt  at  home  when  near  a  great  university. 
He  had  been  so  constantly  about  Harvard.  It  is  curious  to 
note  how  his  travels  tended  to  Oxford,  Cambridge,  the  Parisian 
Lecture  Eooms,  Berlin  and  Heidelberg  and  how  he  coveted  an 
acquaintance  among  their  professors.  There  is  little  mention  to 
be  found,  in  his  letters,  or  diary  of  the  trip,  of  the  great  states 
men  of  Europe.  In  the  little  that  is  said  of  them,  there  is  still 
less  of  their  character  as  statesmen,  but  the  mention  is  mostly 
of  them  as  men  or  as  the  owners  of  great  houses  or  large  es 
tates.  But  his  letters  abound  in  references  to  books  and  schools. 
"  You  have  thrown  out  some  hints,"  he  wrote  Professor  Green- 
leaf,  "  with  regard  to  my  occupying  a  place  with  you  and  the 
Judge  at  Cambridge.  You  know  well  that  my  heart  yearns 
fondly  for  that  place/'  His  thoughts  were  all  of  a  career  in  the 
Law  School  and  as  a  law  writer.  A  career  in  statesmanship 
seemed  to  be  as  far  as  any  from  him.  How  little  he  realized 
what  the  future  had  in  store  for  him ! 

While  editing  the  Jurist  he  had  been  brought  into  con 
tact  with  Professor  Mittermaier  of  Heidelberg.  They  had  ex 
changed  letters  on  subjects  of  mutual  interest  and  the  Profes 
sor  had  been  asked  to  contribute  to  the  Jurist.  They  now 
met  for  the  first  time  and  Sumner  became  intimate  with  him 
and  his  family.  He  had  three  bright  boys  for  whom  Sumner 
formed  an  attachment;  one,  the  assistant  of  his  father,  died 
soon  after  Sumner's  return  from  Europe,  and  in  the  corre 
spondence,  which  was  still  continued  with  the  father,  he  unbos 
omed  his  grief. 

At  Mittermaier's  house  Sumner  met  Professor  Thibaut  then 
near  the  end  of  his  life.  He  was  the  most  eminent  advocate 
of  codification  in  Europe.  His  father  was  a  soldier  and  the 
son  was  designed  for  the  same  profession,  but  after  one  short 
campaign  he  abandoned  it  for  his  studies.  As  a  young  man, 
he  was  strong,  finely  formed,  with  a  handsome  face  and  head, 
enthusiastic  in  his  studies  and  equally  so  in  athletics.  He  be 
came  one  of  the  first  scholars  in  the  university.  After  taking 
his  degree  he  became  successively  Professor  of  Law  atKehl,  Jena 
and  Heidelberg.  Sumner  considered  him  second  in  attainments 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  95 

only  to  Savigny.  He  early  advocated  a  code  for  Germany  and 
finally  secured  the  adoption  of  one.  Sumner  considered  himself 
fortunate,  in  being  able  to  discuss  the  subject  of  codification 
with  the  heads  of  the  two  great  schools,  for  and  against  it,  Thi- 
baut  and  Savigny.  He  heard  their  views  from  their  own  lips 
and  had  the  honor  of  receiving  calls  from  both  of  them  in  his 
room. 

The  practice  of  duelling  was  then  at  its  height  in  the  uni 
versity.  Sumner  saw  three  duels  with  swords.  The  swords 
were  first  taken  to  a  grindstone  where  they  were  ground  sharp. 
With  these  weapons  the  combatants  then  met  in  an  assembly- 
room  where  the  students  in  large  numbers  were  congregated, 
smoking  and  drinking.  A  doctor  was  also  in  attendance  who 
very  coolly  smoked  all  the  while.  Thus  attended,  the  combat 
proceeded,  often  with  serious  results.  In  one  of  them  a  com 
batant  lost  his  nose,  it  being  cut  off  by  his  antagonist  at  one 
blow.  It  was  afterwards  sewed  on  by  the  doctor  for  him ;  but 
he  brushed  it  off  twice  in  the  night. 

The  practice  of  smoking  was  universal.  "  Everybody  in  Ger 
many  smokes/'  Sumner  observed ;  "  I  doubt  not,  I  am  the 
only  man  above  ten  years  old  now  in  the  country  who  does  not." 
It  was  unpleasant  for  him,  who  did  not  use  tobacco  in  any 
form.  He  often  found  himself  shut  up  in  a  carriage  where 
every  one  was  smoking.  It  will  readily  be  imagined  how  dis 
tasteful  this  was  to  him,  when  it  is  remembered  he  could  hardly 
endure  the  confinement  of  a  coach  without  the  smoke.  In  his 
earlier  days  he  was  obliged  to  ride  on  the  outside. 

From  Heidelberg,  Sumner  went  down  the  Rhine  to  Cologne, 
thence  to  Brussels,  Antwerp,  London,  where  he  arrived  on  the 
seventeenth  of  March  and  remained  till  the  fourth  of  April. 
This  was  longer  than  he  at  first  intended.  His  purpose  was  to 
stay  only  a  few  days,  long  enough  to  see  two  or  three  friends 
and  arrange  for  his  passage  home.  But  how  could  he  resist? 
"  I  am  already,"  he  wrote,  "  after  twenty-four  hours'  presence, 
nailed  for  to-morrow  to  see  the  Duchess  of  Sutherland  in  her 
magnificent  palace;  for  the  next  day  to  dine  with  Parkes  to 
meet  Charles  Austin ;  the  next  to  breakfast  with  Sutton  Sharpe, 
to  meet  some  of  my  friends  of  the  Chancery  bar,  then  to  dine 
with  the  Earl  of  Carlisle ;  and  the  next  day  with  Bates.  Mor- 
peth  wishes  me  to  see  the  Lansdownes  and  Hollands,  but  I  de 
cline." 

The  time  slipped  away.  He  knew  so  many  people;  had 
formed  such  pleasant  acquaintances  and  there  was  still  so  much 
of  interest  to  him  in  London,  that  it  was  hard  to  break  away. 
London  is  more  bewitching  than  ever,"  he  wrote.  "  Have  al- 


96  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

ready  seen  many  people, — the  Lansdownes ;  Duke  and  Duchess 
of  Sutherland  (the  most  beautiful  woman  in  the  world) ;  Mrs. 
Norton,  Lady  Seymour  (both  very  beautiful)  ;  Hayward;  Syd 
ney  Smith ;  Senior ;  Fonblanque ;  Milnes ;  Milman ;  the  Grotes ; 
Charles  Austin  (more  brilliant  than  ever)  ;  the  Wortleys,  etc. 
But  I  must  stop.  I  must  now  go  to  breakfast  with  Sydney 
Smith ;  to-morrow  with  Kogers ;  next  day  with  dear  Sir  Robert 
Inglis ;  the  next  day  with  Milnes."  This  is  a  formidable  list  of 
well  known  people  and  shows  Sumner's  popularity  in  England. 
His  last  dinner  was  with  Hallam,  where  were  Milman,  Bab- 
bage,  Hayward,  Francis  Homer,  etc.  He  parted  with  many 
friends  and  received  the  most  affectionate  good  wishes.  Lady 
Carlisle  and  Ingham  shed  tears  in  parting  with  him. 

He  engaged  passage  for  New  York  by  the  "  Wellington " 
and  embarked  at  Portsmouth,  having  as  a  fellow  passenger 
Dr.  J.  G.  Cogswell  who  was  in  Europe  to  place  a  grandson  of 
John  Jacob  Astor  in  school  and  to  make  purchases  for  the 
newly  projected  Astor  Library  of  New  York,  of  which  he  had 
been  chosen  Librarian.  Other  fellow  passengers  were  N.  P. 
Willis,  his  wife  and  her  sister.  He  reached  New  York  on  May 
third,  1840,  after  an  absence  of  two  years  and  five  months. 
The  journey  cost  him  something  more  than  five  thousand 
dollars. 

But  it  was  one  of  the  most  profitable  periods  of  his  life, 
hardly  less  so  than  his  years  in  college.  He  had  studied  and 
mastered  successively  the  French,  Italian  and  German  lan 
guages.  He  had  seen  the  great  countries  of  Europe  and  mingled 
with  their  people.  He  had  visited  their  great  universities, 
made  the  acquaintance  of  their  professors  and  saw  their  methods 
of  instruction.  He  had  seen  the  most  famous  art  treasures  of 
the  world,  the  finest  architecture  of  the  present  and  the  remains 
of  the  greatest  of  the  past.  But  above  all  he  had  seen  and  heard 
and  known  many  of  the  greatest  men  then  living  and  whose 
names  are  now  historic.  He  had  before  read  their  works  and 
knew  them,  but  what  was  this  as  compared  with  seeing  the  au 
thors,  meeting  them  in  their  homes  and  talking  with  them,  face 
to  face,  so  that  every  mention  of  them  thereafter  was  to  awaken 
a  train  of  pleasant  memories.  It  was  largely  due  to  the  culture 
of  those  two  years  and  a  half  that  Sumner  came  afterwards  to 
be  known  as  the  most  accomplished  man  in  the  American 
Senate. 


CHAPTER  X 

WELCOME    HOME — CAMPAIGN    OF     1840 — RESUMES    WORK OF 
FICE  OF  HILLARD  AND  SUMNER PHILLIPS   MATCH   CASE 

RIGHT  OF  SEARCH PRACTICE— UNPROFESSIONAL  STUDIES 

FROM  Few  York,  Sumner  went  directly  to  the  family  resi 
dence  in  Boston.  This  was  to  be  his  future  home. 

A  warm  welcome  awaited  him.  There  had  always  been  a 
strong  affection  between  him  and  his  mother  and  the  death  of 
his  father  seemed  to  make  the  tie  even  stronger  than  before. 
He  was  her  eldest  son,  bearing  his  father's  name,  the  best  edu 
cated  and  the  most  substantial  of  all  her  children.  She  felt  that 
she  must  look  to  him,  as  her  adviser  and  mainstay.  His  sisters, 
Mary  and  Julia,  had  grown  to  be  young  women,  during  his 
absence.  The  loving  expectancy  with  which  they  had  hoped  to 
entwine  his  life  with  theirs  reached  out  to  him  at  the  thresh 
old.  His  former  law  partner,  Hillard,  who  alone  had  kept  the 
office  at  Number  Four  Court  Street,  in  his  absence,  was  re 
joiced  at  the  prospect  of  dividing  its  confinement  as  well  as 
its  cares  and  labors.  Sumner  was  a  warm-hearted,  genial,  com 
panionable  man  and  a  host  of  friends  were  glad  to  welcome 
him  back.  In  homes  where  he  had  been  familiar,  as  in  Judge 
Story's  arid  Professor  Greenleaf's,  he  was  received,  as  before,  al 
most  as  one  of  the  family. 

The  first  weeks  after  his  arrival  were  occupied  with  renewing 
acquaintances,  calling  upon  friends  and  talking  over  the  ex 
periences  of  his  trip.  He  felt  little  inclination  to  return  to  work 
at  once,  for  his  studies  abroad,  in  Italy  and  Germany,  had 
been  so  laborious  that  he  needed  rest  and  time  to  gather  his 
thoughts  home  from  his  trip.  The  attorneys  and  judges  were 
soon  to  be  off  on  their  summer's  vacation  and  the  courts  being 
closed,  little  could  be  done  then  in  a  law  office.  During 
August,  he  spent  a  few  days  at  Nahant,  a  seaside  resort  about 
fourteen  miles  from  Boston,  where  he  dined  with  William  H. 
Prescott.  Later  in  the  same  month  he  drove  in  a  gig  to  Lan 
caster,  a  small  village  near  Worcester,  with  Felton,  who  went 
to  spend  Sunday  with  his  wife.  On  the  way  they  stopped  at 
Concord  and  dined  with  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson.  When  Sumner 
went  to  Europe,  Emerson  had  given  him  a  letter  of  introduc 
tion  to  Thomas  Carlyle  and  each  enjoyed  this  opportunity  of 

97 


98  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

exchanging  their  recollections  of  him.  Emerson  was  a  constant 
correspondent  of  Carlyle.  Sumner  afterwards  recalled  Emer 
son's  two  interesting  children,  a  boy  and  a  girl,  the  latter 
playfully  called  by  her  father  his  "  honeycomb". 

The  year  of  Sumner's  return,  from  Europe,  1840,  will  ever 
be  memorable  for  one  of  the  most  remarkable  campaigns  in 
the  history  of  American  politics.  The  Whigs  had  been  out  of 
office  for  twelve  years  and  were  correspondingly  hungry;  the 
Democrats  having  been  as  long  successful  were  now  under  the 
control  of  a  President  who  was  a  consummate  political  leader 
and  they  bore  themselves  with  confident  superiority.  The 
Whigs  nominated  as  their  candidate  William  H.  Harrison  and 
the  Democrats  renominated  Martin  Van  Buren.  Harrison 
could  be  paraded  as  a  "military  hero,"  for  he  had  about  a 
quarter  of  a  century  before,  been  a  soldier  in  the  war  of  1812, 
and  in  some  skirmishes  with  the  Indians,  notably  at  Tippe- 
canoe,  had  borne  himself  creditably.  He  could  also  pose  as  a 
political  martyr,  for  he  had  been  rather  roughly  recalled  from  a 
foreign  mission,  by  Jackson  to  make  a  place  for  one  of  his 
favorites.  At  the  time  of  his  nomination  he  was  living  quietly 
on  his  farm  in  Ohio. 

Corruption  in  public  office  was  rampant.  Van  Buren  was 
from  the  State  of  New  York.  Unfortunately  the  Collector  of 
Customs  at  New  York  City  had  been  found  to  be  a  defaulter 
to  the  amount  of  $1,125,000,  and  the  United  States  District 
Attorney  for  the  State  of  New  York  was  $72,000  short.  Harri 
son  was  the  very  man  to  be  called,  like  Cincinnatus,  from  his 
plough  to  save  the  nation.  There  probably  never  was  a  political 
campaign  of  more  noise  and  less  sense  than  that  which  fol 
lowed.  Half  the  nation  seemed  to  be  turned  loose  to  follow 
brass  bands,  in  processions,  and  sing  the  doggerel  of  campaign 
song  books.  The  Democrats  in  derision  pointed  to  Harrison  as 
a  rough  farmer,  tilling  his  own  land,  living  in  a  log  cabin  and 
drinking  hard  cider.  The  Whigs  returned  the  taunt  by  saying, 
that  Van  Buren  was  living  in  a  mansion,  surrounded  by  thugs 
and  jobbers  and  eating  out  of  "  gold  spoons  ".  The  jibe  of  the 
Democrats  was  at  least  unfortunate.  Thenceforward  a  log 
cabin,  mounted  on  wheels,  its  sides  decorated  with  coon-skins 
and  a  cider  barrel  at  the  door,  the  whole  drawn  by  numerous 
teams  of  horses,  swelled  every  procession.  The  cabin  and  cider 
barrel  adorned  every  badge.  They  were  the  drawing  symbols  of 
a  plain,  honest  life  and  the  whole  nation  seemed  to  be  marching 
to  the  tune  of  "  Tippecanoe  and  Tyler  too  ".  Eloquence  too 
was  plentiful.  A  meeting  was  appointed  in  some  grove,  the 
people  gathered  in  long  processions,  an  ox  was  roasted  whole, 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  99 

to  feed  the  assembled  multitude  and  they  were  addressed  by 
such  orators  as  Henry  Clay  and  Tom  Corwin  of  the  West  and 
Daniel  Webster  of  the  East.  The  famous  passage  of  Webster's ; 
"  It  did  not  happen  to  me  to  be  born  in  a  log-cabin,  but  some 
of  my  brothers  and  sisters  were  ",  so  familiar  now  to  every 
schoolboy,  was  one  of  the  products  of  the  campaign. 

Yet  Sumner,  at  thirty  years  of  age,  was  a  silent  witness  of  all 
this.  The  circumstance  shows  how  little  interest  he  then  felt 
in  the  great  arena  in  which  his  life  was  to  be  cast.  Thus  far 
he  had  taken  no  active  part  in  politics.  His  father's  inclination 
had  been  to  the  Whig  party  and  this  naturally  was  his.  It  was 
also  natural  for  him  to  be  repelled  by  the  cries  of  corruption 
then  raised  against  the  Democrats  and  to  be  attracted  by  the 
pledges  of  the  Whigs  to  reform  the  public  service.  The  superior 
culture  of  such  men  as  Daniel  Webster,  John  Quincy  Adams 
and  Edward  Everett,  appealed  strongly  to  the  educated  young 
men  of  Boston,  in  the  choice  of  a  party.  Sumner  probably 
voted  for  Harrison ;  but  he  had  been  abroad  for  two  years  and 
love  of  country  rather  than  of  any  party  was  his  predominant 
feeling,  and  it  is  not  certainly  known  how  he  voted.  He  en 
joyed  many  of  the  ludicrous  phases  of  the  campaign;  but 
deprecated  so  much  strife  and  faction  as  he  saw.  "  There  is  so 
much  passion,"  he  wrote,  "  and  so  little  principle,  so  much  de 
votion  to  party  and  so  little  to  country  in  both  parties,  that  I 
think  we  have  occasion  for  anxiety." 

With  the  return  of  September,  Sumner  settled  down  to  work 
in  his  office.  The  partnership  with  Hillard  had  never  been 
dissolved,  but  as  he  had  done  all  the  work  during  Stunner's  ab 
sence,  he  was  allowed  all  the  earnings.  Sumner  was  resolved 
to  be  diligent.  He  wished  to  earn  money  and  pay  the  debt  he 
had  contracted  by  his  trip  to  Europe.  He  declined  an  invita 
tion  to  deliver  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa  oration  at  Bowdoin  Col 
lege,  because  it  would  require  time  that  he  could  not  now  afford 
to  lose  from  his  business.  He  was  punctually  in  his  office  from 
nine  o'clock  in  the  morning  until  six  in  the  evening,  with  only 
the  interval  of  an  hour  for  dinner.  He  was  at  work  upon  the 
third  volume  of  "  Sumner's  Reports,"  of  Judge  Story's  decis 
ions  in  the  U.  S.  Circuit  Court,  which  he  got  ready  for  the  press 
by  the  middle  of  December.  This  with  his  professional  en 
gagements  occupied  his  time.  He  did  not  appear  in  the  trial 
of  many  cases.  The  practice  of  the  firm  of  Hillard  and  Sum 
ner  does  not  seem  ever  to  have  been  large.  But  his  preparation 
for  a  trial  was  elaborate.  He  read  widely  and  made  numerous 
citations  of  authorities,  in  support  of  the  positions  he  took  in 


100  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

the  trial  of  his  cases.  He  was  always  inclined  to  be  more  pro 
fuse  than  exact. 

They  had  several  friends  who  were  instrumental  in  bringing 
them  business.  Eufus  Choate,  then  in  the  enjoyment  of  well 
deserved  fame  as  an  advocate,  had  his  office  in  the  same  build 
ing  with  theirs  and  occasionally  dropped  into  their  rooms,  to 
indulge  his  fondness  for  the  society  of  young  men  and  his  taste 
for  talk  upon  literary  subjects.  Sumner's  brief  estimate  of 
Choate.,  whose  fame  is  fast  becoming  traditional,  is  interesting 
as  the  contemporary  judgment  of  one  who  often  witnessed  his 
efforts.  "  His  position  here,"  he  wrote,  "  is  very  firm.  He  is  the 
leader  of  our  bar,  with  an  overwhelming  superfluity  of  business, 
with  a  strong  taste  for  books  and  learned  men,  with  great 
amiableness  of  character,  with  uncommon  eloquence  and  untir 
ing  industry."  Choate  and  Webster  procured  Hillard  and 
Sumner's  employment  in  the  boundary  dispute  between  Massa 
chusetts  and  Ehode  Island.  William  W.  Story  was  a  student 
in  their  office  and  his  father,  Judge  Story,  when  not  absent  from 
home  engaged  in  his  duties  as  a  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  frequently  dropped  in  on  them.  They 
sometimes  got  clients  who  came  to  them  because  they  thought 
that  Judge  Story's  friendship  for  them  might  influence  his 
judgment  in  their  favor.  Professor  Greenleaf  still  kept  a  desk 
in  the  office  and  there  met  the  clients  he  served.  He  procured 
their  employment  occasionally,  notably  in  a  suit  brought  to 
contest  the  patent  right  of  the  Phillips  friction  match,  a  litiga 
tion  which  was  in  court  in  more  than  one  form  and  continued 
through  four  years.  Professor  Greenleaf  withdrew  from  it 
early,  leaving  the  responsibility  of  it  with  them. 

In  this  case  Sumner  took  an  unusual  interest.  The  stake 
at  issue  was  large  and  the  question  a  close  one.  It  was  to  be 
tried  before  Judge  Story  in  the  United  States  Courts.  A  suit 
was  brought  to  enjoin  the  use  of  the  patent  on  a  friction  match, 
on  the  ground  of  the  prior  knowledge  and  use  of  the  invention, 
by  Sumner's  client.  Another  suit  was  also  brought,  by  his 
client,  to  recover  damages  for  the  invasion  of  his  right  to  the 
invention.  Depositions  were  taken  by  Sumner  at  various  places 
and  the  testimony  became  very  voluminous.  The  suit  to  enjoin 
the  defendant  was  not  tried  until  December,  1843,  and  the 
damage  case  not  until  1844,  in  November.  Judge  Story  de 
cided  the  injunction  case  against  Sumner's  client.  In  the 
damage  case  they  were  more  successful.  It  was  tried  to  a  jury 
and  Sumner's  client  recovered  a  verdict.  Judge  Story  ruled 
upon  several  important  questions,  in  the  trial  of  this  case, 
against  Sumner's  client ;  and  he  was  annoyed  at  Sumner's  per- 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SU-M-NER 

sistency,  in  pressing  them.  But  the  jury  seems  to  have  thought 
more  favorably  of  the  case  than  the  Judge.  A  motion  to  set 
aside  the  verdict  was  made,  but,  pending  its  hearing,  the  case 
was  settled.  Sumner  took  a  leading  part  in  the  trial  and  it  is 
considered  his  principal  effort  at  the  bar.  He  was  opposed  by 
Franklin  Dexter,  one  of  the  ablest  attorneys  in  Boston. 

Another  professional  engagement  that  interested  Sumner 
grew  out  of  the  right  claimed  by  Great  Britain  to  search  Amer 
ican  vessels.  The  slave  trade  had  been  abolished  by  England 
and  all  her  vessels  were  forbidden  from  engaging  in  the  traffic. 
She  had  a  perfect  right  to  search  her  own  vessels,  and  see  that 
the  laws  of  England  were  not  violated  by  her  subjects;  and  she 
freely  exercised  this  right.  But  some  of  her  vessels  still  en 
gaged  in  the  traffic.  To  elude  detection,  such  vessels  when 
pursued  would  sometimes  hoist  the  American  flag  and,  under 
it,  claim  immunity  from  search.  To  break  up  this  practice 
England  adopted  the  rule  and  claimed  the  right  to  board  every 
vessel  upon  the  high  seas,  suspected  and,  by  an  examination  of 
her  papers,  determine  whether  she  was  an  English  vessel  or  not. 
The  result  was  that  many  American  vessels  were  overhauled 
and  detained  and  subjected  to  annoyances.  A  similar  claim  on 
the  part  of  England  had  before  this  resulted  in  a  war  between 
the  two  countries,  and  this  threatened  to  renew  it.  During  the 
continuance  of  the  practice,  British  vessels  that  had  made  these 
searches  occasionally  put  into  the  port  of  Boston  and  were 
sued  for  damages  by  the  owners  of  the  vessels  they  had  detained. 
The  British  consul  retained  Hillard  and  Sumner  to  defend 
them.  Sumner  took  a  deep  interest  in  these  cases  and  made  a 
careful  study  of  the  international  law  upon  the  subject.  With 
a  view  to  influencing  public  opinion  he  wrote  and  published  in 
the  Boston  Advertiser  an  elaborate  argument  in  support  of 
the  right  of  "  inquiry  "  as  he  called  it.  This  article  was  replied 
to  through  the  press  and  he  published  a  rejoinder. 

The  subject  has  an  additional  interest  here.  It  was  another 
event  in  Sumner's  life  that  called  his  attention  to  the  enor 
mities  of  the  slave  trade  and  aided  in  establishing  his  convic 
tions  early.  The  debate  he  heard  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
upon  the  bill  to  abolish  slavery  in  England,  and  his  association 
with  Lord  Brougham,  will  be  remembered  in  the  same  connec 
tion.  These  things,  with  the  study  they  induced  him  to  give 
the  subject  of  slavery,  prepared  him  afterwards  to  take  the  tide 
at  its  flood  that  led  him  on  to  fame  and  fortune.  He  had  the 
deep  conviction  of  leadership  at  a  time  when  other  men  faltered. 
He  was  prepared  to  go  right  on,  while  they  hesitated,  to  debate 
and  by  debating  to  be  convinced  that  he  was  right. 


l-'Oy  .LIFE 'OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

But  these  were  suits  of  exceptional  interest  with  Hillard  and 
Sumner.  Their  practice  had  nothing  unusual,  in  either  its  char 
acter  or  its  extent.  It  was  not  better  than  that  of  other  young 
men  and  indeed  was  hardly  so  good.  It  consisted  generally  of 
making  collections,  of  defending  persons  charged  with  petty 
crimes,  before  magistrates,  and  of  writing  depositions,  where 
complaint  was  sometimes  made  that  Sumner  was  not  content 
to  let  the  attorneys  ask  questions,  but  insisted  upon  asking 
some  himself,  so  as  to  see  that  the  witness  told  the  whole  truth. 
Sometimes  like  other  young  men  they  had  other  more  impor 
tant  business.  Once  we  know  he  charged  a  fee  of  six  hundred 
dollars  and  his  client  agreed  that  it  was  no  more  than  he  had 
earned;  a  good  fee  even  for  these  latter  days.  But  such  pay 
came  seldom.  His  heart  was  not  in  his  lawsuits.  He  felt  that 
while  by  these  things  he  was  earning  a  living,  his  mind  and 
heart  were  not  being  improved  or  invigorated. 

He  was  ambitious ;  he  was  plunging  nightly  into  history  and 
biography ;  his  thoughts  were  busy  with  the  great  and,  in  most 
cases,  now  impossible  exemplars  of  history.  He  had  a  strong 
desire  to  fix  his  own  name  permanently  in  the  remembrance  of 
posterity.  He  felt  that  he  was  not  accomplishing  this,  that 
none  of  the  work  he  was  doing,  in  his  profession,  could  give  him 
any  enduring  fame,  that  it  might  be  well  enough,  for  one  who 
was  intent  merely  on  gaining  a  livelihood,  but  that  he,  with  his 
ideals,  with  the  resolutions  he  had  formed  for  lofty  endeavor 
and  noble  achievements,  ought  not  to  be  satisfied  with  it. 

At  this  time  Sumner  did  not  seem  to  desire  public  office.  The 
sacrifice  of  personal  independence,  which  he  thought  it  involved, 
was  distasteful.  His  thoughts  were  more  of  books  and  author 
ship  and  literary  distinction.  In  1842,  a  vacancy  occurred  in 
the  office  of  Reporter  of  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States.  He  had  some  experience  of  this  kind,  in  re 
porting  the  decisions  of  Judge  Story  upon  the  circuit.  The 
judge  desired  to  secure  his  appointment  to  fill  this  vacancy. 
At  his  suggestion  Sumner  considered  the  matter  and  while  de 
clining  to  seek  the  office  he  expressed  his  willingness  to  accept  it, 
if  it  was  offered  to  him.  But  he  did  not  secure  the  appointment. 
It  was  made  in  the  absence  of  Judge  Story  from  Washington 
and  unexpectedly.  It  would  not  have  been  a  very  fortunate 
appointment.  Sumner  was  not  a  sufficiently  accurate  and 
painstaking  and  technical  lawyer,  and  the  other  members  of 
the  court  probably  felt  so  and  hence  forestalled  his  appointment. 
But  it  was  a  disappointment  to  him  and  Judge  Story,  though  it 
was  fortunate  for  Sumner.  The  position  is  a  permanent  one 
with  a  moderate  salary  and-  would,  in  all  probability,  have  occu- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  103 

pied  his  time,  giving  him  in  return  for  it  a  comfortable  living  in 
a  place  of  some  dignity,  till  the  productive  period  of  his  life  was 
past.  Had  he  obtained  it,  we  would  probably  have  known  him 
by  the  print  of  his  name  upon  the  volumes  he  reported,  but 
the  enduring  work  he  did  in  the  Senate  and  his  orations  and 
published  writings  would  have  been  lost.  A  kindlier  Providence 
than  he  then  saw,  withheld  it  from  him. 

This  was  a  turning  period  in  Sumner's  life.  His  wish  for 
a  place  in  the  Law  School  at  Harvard  was  not  so  strong  as  it 
had  been.  His  vision  of  distinction  as  a  jurist  or  judge  or 
writer  on  legal  subjects  was  vanishing.  His  attention  was  being 
attracted  more  to  practical  men  and  measures  aside  from  the 
law.  He  had  thoughts  of  authorship  in  general  literature,  of 
history  and  kindred  subjects.  He  was  interested  in  educational 
reform.  His  friendships  and  associations  aided  to  draw  his 
attention  to  this  subject.  Lieber  was  a  teacher  in  the  South. 
Samuel  G.  Howe,  in  whose  company  he  spent  much  of  his 
leisure  time,  during  the  years  following  his  return  from  Europe, 
was  the  superintendent  of  an  institute  for  the  education  of 
the  blind.  Longfellow  was  a  professor  in  Harvard.  Seeing 
the  greater  culture  of  the  higher  classes  in  England,  he  urged 
raising  the  standard  at  Harvard.  President  Quincy,  in  an  ad 
dress  before  the  Board  of  Overseers,  afterwards  urged  that  the 
requirements  for  graduation  be  increased  and,  though  Sumner 
was  unable  to  be  present  and  witness  the  deliberations,  upon 
the  question,  owing  to  a  severe  cold,  he  promptly  wrote  the 
President  congratulating  him  upon  the  advanced  stand  he 
had  taken. 

Sumner's  days  now  were  occupied  in  his  office,  but  his  nights, 
often  till  one  or  two  o'clock,  were  spent  in  reading.  His  favor 
ite  subjects  were  history  and  biography,  but  he  did  not  allow 
such  books  to  exclude  other  and  lighter  ones.  He  cultivated 
a  taste  for  whatever  was  catholic,  in  literature,  and  was,  as 
he  desired  to  be,  a  well-read  man.  He  continually  made 
notes  of  readings,  in  books  kept  for  permanent  use,  thus  pre 
serving  data  and  copies  of  passages  which  he  admired  and 
incidents,  which  might  be  used,  in  his  own  productions,  by 
way  of  illustration.  The  notes  which  he  thus  made,  were 
frequently  used  in  his  productions  after  he  became  a  Senator. 

Much  credit  is  to  be  given  to  his  European  trip  for  his 
love  of  reading.  For  years  he  had  looked  forward  to  such  a 
journey  and  he  secured  it  under  such  difficult  circumstances 
as  made  him  anxious  to  profit  by  it.  He  read  history  and 
biography  carefully  as  one  means  of  preparation  for  it.  How 
could  he  hope  for  any  great  profit  from  his  trip,  without  know- 


104          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ing  the  history  of  the  countries  he  was  to  visit,  where  their 
great  battles  were  fought,  what  were  the  turning  events, 
what  were  their  great  names  and  for  what  were  they  cele 
brated  ?  These  were  wide  subjects  and  gave  scope  for  endless 
study.  How  could  he  meet  and  mingle  with  their  eminent 
men,  without  being  able  to  talk  intelligently  of  what  they 
talked  about?  How  could  he  carry  letters  of  introduction 
to  such  men  without  knowing  something  of  their  careers — if 
a  Judge,  of  his  decisions;  if  a  Member  of  Parliament,  of  his 
politics;  if  an  author,  of  his  books?  How  could  he  hope  to  be 
successful  in  the  society  of  these  countries  without  being 
intelligent?  These  were  questions  that  were  suggested  to 
him.  To  make  this  trip  profitable,  as  he  intended  it  should 
be,  required  preparation,  by  way  of  wide  and  careful  reading, 
and  such  reading  created  a  taste  for  good  books. 

After  his  return  he  was  stimulated  to  pursue  his  reading 
further;  for  then  he  had  seen  London  and  her  Tower  and 
Parliament  and  courts  and  schools;  Scotland,  with  her  Lochs 
and  Highlands,  her  ruined  abbeys,  her  Abbotsford  and  Edin 
burgh;  Paris  and  Versailles;  Genoa,  with  her  walls,  "her 
mural  crown,  studded  with  towers;"  Eome  and  Florence  and 
Venice,  with  their  treasures  of  art  and  architecture;  Germany 
and  Holland.  He  had  seen  and  was  acquainted  with  many 
of  the  greatest  men  in  Europe.  Every  history  of  these  countries 
he  took  up,  referred  to  persons  or  places  he  knew  and  had 
seen.  Therefore  he  plunged  into  books,  with  a  new  interest. 
The  going  to  Europe  had  required  of  him  constant  study 
and  preparation  and  had  enlarged  his  reading.  Seeing  Europe 
had  added  interest  to  what  he  saw  and  stimulated  him  to 
read  more  widely  of  the  persons  and  places  he  had  visited. 

His  heart  still  turned  to  these  countries.  "  Give  me 
fifteen  hundred  dollars  a  year,"  he  wrote  Longfellow,  "  and  I 
will  hie  away  to  Florence,  where  in  sight  of  what  is  most 
beautiful  in  art  and  with  the  most  inspiring  associations  about 
me,  I  will  feed  on  the  ambrosia  of  life  nor  find  the  day  long 
which  I  can  give  undisturbed  to  the  great  masters  of  human 
thought.  Stop !  Say  nothing  of  this  or  my  professional 
chances  will  be  up/'  It  is  a  fact  that  in  his  office  he  was 
inclined  to  talk  too  much  about  Europe  to  persons  who  came 
in  on  business.  It  gave  the  impression  that  his  heart  was  not 
in  his  work  and  was  thought  to  have  an  unfavorable  effect 
upon  his  practice. 

Sumner  had  numerous  correspondents  among  his  friends  in 
Europe, — Hayward,  Professors  Whewell  and  Mittermaier, 
Ingham,  Lords  Morpeth  and  Penman  and  Greenough  and  Craw- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  105 

ford  and  others.  Some  of  them  he  heard  from  only  occasionally 
and  from  others,  Ingham,  Mittermaier,  Morpeth  and  Crawford, 
the  letters  were  frequent.  The  latter  had  been  his  most 
intimate  friends.  Professor  Mittermaier  and  Sumner  corre 
sponded  in  German  and  made  exchanges  of  books.  In  1841 
both  Ingham  and  Lord  Morpeth  were  candidates  for  seats  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  though  both  failed  of  election;  Sum 
ner  watched  the  campaign  with  interest  and  regretted  their 
defeat.  Instead  of  Ingham,  Milnes,  another  of  Sumner's 
friends,  was  elected. 

Lord  Morpeth  shortly  after  his  defeat,  came  to  the  United 
States  and  spent  several  months  travelling  in  the  West  and 
South  and  extending  his  journey  into  Canada.  Sumner  gave 
him  letters  to  friends  in  other  cities  and  met  him  in  Boston 
and  introduced  him,  went  with  him  to  places  of  interest  and 
showed  him  many  attentions.  Longfellow,  Sumner's  friend, 
had  him  to  dine,  with  Allston  and  Prescott,  the  evening  of  his 
arrival.  And  Sumner  gave  a  dinner  for  him  at  the  Tremont 
House.  These  attentions  were  kindly  remembered  by  Lord 
Morpeth. 

The  year  after  his  return  from  Europe,  Sumner  rendered 
a  service  for  his  friend  Crawford.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  he  had  admired  his  "  Orpheus  ",  a  bas-relief  upon  which 
he  was  engaged,  when  Sumner  was  in  Eome.  In  1841,  he  raised 
a  subscription  of  twenty-five  hundred  dollars  to  purchase  it, 
for  the  Boston  Athena3um.  Crawford  gratefully  acknowledged 
the  kindness,  by  executing  a  bust  of  Sumner  and  presenting 
it  to  him.  To  aw^aken  public  interest  in  the  tf  Orpheus,"  Sum 
ner  wrote  an  article,  published  in  the  Boston  papers,  the 
Democratic  Review  and  Advertiser,  in  which  he  narrated  the 
legend  that  furnished  the  subject  for  the  study  and  gave  a 
description  of  the  work  and  its  merits. 

The  "  Orpheus  "  was  not  finished  at  the  time  it  was  ordered 
and  did  not  reach  Boston  till  1843.  On  opening  the  box, 
Sumner  was  much  disappointed  to  find  it  had  been  broken  in 
the  passage.  But  it  was  restored,  so  that  the  break  was  scarcely 
noticeable.  It  was  not  open  to  general  exhibition,  until  the 
summer  of  1844,  though  during  the  preceding  winter  it  was 
privately  exhibited  to  a  few  persons  of  some  art  attainments. 
They  praised  it  enthusiastically  and  Sumner  conveyed  this 
intelligence  to  Crawford.  In  June,  1844,  it  was  opened  to  the 
public  with  an  exhibition,  planned  by  Sumner,  of  all  Crawford's 
works  then  in  Boston,  making  the  "  Orpheus  "  the  central  piece. 
The  bust  of  himself  was  included  in  the  collection.  He  was 
not  satisfied  with  the  lights  which  the  Athenaeum  afforded  and 


106  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

to  show  the  work  to  better  advantage,  he  had  a  temporary 
booth  built  and  fitted  up  adjoining  the  Athenaeum,  for  the 
exhibition.  It  was  all  done  by  Sumner  to  awaken  an  interest 
in  Crawford  and  his  work  as  an  artist.  Sumner  felt  that  he 
was  not  appreciated  as  his  ability  deserved.  The  purpose  was 
accomplished  and  Crawford's  reputation  as  an  artist  was 
established  in  Boston.  The  "  Orpheus "  still  remains  there 
a  monument  to  the  beautiful  relation  of  two  men,  each  now 
celebrated,  but  both  then  young  and  struggling  for  position. 

Crawford  never  forgot  the  kindness  thus  done  him,  at  a 
time  when  he  needed  such  help.  His  principal  works,  his 
bronze  statue  of  Beethoven,  executed  for  the  Boston  Music 
Hall,  his  colossal  equestrian  statue  of  Washington  on  the 
grounds  of  the  State  Capitol  at  Eichmond,  Va.,  and  his  stat 
uary  in  marble  and  bronze  for  the  National  Capitol  at  Wash 
ington,  were  all  executed  at  a  later  period.  Before  he  died 
orders  came  to  him  in  abundance  and  his  fame  as  one  of  the 
greatest  of  American  artists  is  now  secure.  But  to  the  end, 
his  heart  went  out  in  gratitude  for  the  help  and  encourage 
ment  that  thus  came,  in  the  days  of  struggle.  Writing  to 
George  Sumner,  the  brother  of  Charles,  he  declared  that  he 
had  placed  this  friendship  nearer  his  heart  than  any  other 
in  the  United  States  except  only  that  for  his  own  family. 

George  was  at  this  time  in  Europe.  His  travels  were  pro 
tracted  beyond  what  Charles  thought  to  be  for  his  good 
and  he  did  not  hesitate  to  say  so.  His  time  was  not  idled 
away.  He  visited  Holland  and  England  and  made  a  careful 
study  from  original  sources  of  the  early  lives  and  character 
of  the  first  Puritan  settlers  of  New  England.  He  recorded 
the  result  of  his  studies,  and  his  manuscripts  have  since  been 
deposited  with  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society  and  are 
referred  to  now  with  confidence,  by  writers  upon  the  Puritan 
period  of  American  history.  George's  tastes  were  more  ex 
clusive  than  Charles'.  Politics  and  history  interested  him, 
but  for  general  literature  he  had  less  fondness  and  he  was 
disposed  to  overlook  the  merits  of  men  of  a  more  imaginative 
turn  of  mind  than  himself.  He  visited  Eome  and  met  and 
liked  Crawford.  But  he  preferred  Paris  to  London  and  crit 
icised  Charles  for  his  too  great  fondness  for  England  and  some 
of  his  English  friends.  Charles  replied  to  him  in  a  letter 
which  reveals  a  good  deal  of  his  own  character. 

"  You  enjoy  conversation,"  he  wrote,  "  on  politics,  statistics 
and  history.  Do  you  sufficiently  appreciate  talent  out  of  this 
walk?  For  instance,  Kenyon  does  not  care  a  pin  for  these 
topics;  but  he  is  exuberant  with  poetry  and  graceful  anec- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  107 

dote;  so  that  I  must  count  him  one  of  the  most  interesting 
men  I  have  ever  met.  And  I  remember  breakfasts  at  his 
house  which  were  full  of  the  most  engaging  conversation.  .  .  . 
I  like  to  find  good  in  everything;  and  in  all  men  of  cultivated 
minds  and  hearts,  thank  God,  there  is  a  good  deal  of  good  to  be 
found.  In  some  it  shows  itself  in  one  shape,  and  in  some  in 
another;  some  will  select  your  favorite  themes,  while  others 
enjoy  ideality  and  its  productions  manifold."  .  .  . 

"This  world  is  full  of  harstyiess.  It  is  easier  to  censure 
than  to  praise ;  the  former  is  a  gratification  of  our  self-esteem ; 
while  to  praise  seems,  with  minds  too  ambitious  and  un 
generous,  a  tacit  admission  of  superiority.  It  is  a  bane  of 
society  wherever  I  have  known  it, — and  here  in  Boston  as 
much  as  in  London, — a  perpetual  seeking  for  something  which 
will  disparage  or  make  ridiculous  our  neighbors.  Their 
conduct  is  canvassed,  and  mean  and  selfish  motives  are  at 
tributed  to  them.  Their  foibles  are  dragged  into  day.  I 
do  not  boast  myself  to  be  free  from  blame  on  this  account; 
and  yet  I  try  to  find  what  is  good  and  beautiful  in  all  that 
I  see,  and  to  judge  my  fellow  creatures  as  I  would  have  them 
judge  me." 


CHAPTER  XI 

IN  SOCIETY FRIENDS THE  MISSES  WARD HOWE JULIA  WARD 

HOWE'S       MARRIAGE LONGFELLOW THE       PRESCOTTS — 

BANCROFT WM.  W.  STORY ALLSTON CHANNING ADAMS 

THEIR  INFLUENCE   ON  SUMNER LITERARY  PROJECTS   OF 

FRIENDS HABITS WHY  NOT  MARRIED 

DURING  the  years  succeeding  his  trip  to  Europe,  Sunnier 
was  popular  in  Boston  society.  He  had  a  fine  presence  and  the 
easy  address,  which  comes  of  familiarity  with  good  company, 
besides  the  reputation  for  scholarly  attainments  which  always 
counted  for  much  in  Boston.  His  sister  Mary  was  then  a 
beautiful  young  woman,  tall,  well-formed  and  graceful,  a  good 
dancer  and  of  a  lovely  disposition, — the  fairest  of  all  his  sisters. 
She  was  a  great  favorite  with  Charles  and  he  took  much  pleas 
ure  in  acting  as  her  escort.  At  the  time  of  his  return,  she 
was  eighteen  years  of  age  and  apparently  in  perfect  health, 
though  she  died  four  years  later,  after  a  lingering  illness  of 
consumption.  Julia,  too,  the  youngest  of  the  family,  was  thir 
teen  years  old  and  was  soon  in  society.  The  best  homes  in 
Boston  were  open  to  them.  They  attended  parties  and  recep 
tions  together  and  the  usual  gatherings  of  young  people.  At 
that  time  horseback  riding  was  a  favorite  amusement  and 
his  letters  contain  occasional  references  to  excursions  made,  in 
this  way,  in  the  company  of  young  ladies. 

After  his  death,  his  sister  Julia  wrote :  "  It  seems  but  yes 
terday  that  I  was  the  happy,  careless  schoolgirl,  recounting 
eagerly  to  his  kindly,  sympathetic  ear  at  dinner  the  experiences 
of  the  morning  at  school,  or  going  to  him  for  help  in  my 
Latin  lessons."  While  she  was  a  student  at  Mr.  Emerson's  pri 
vate  school  for  young  ladies,  in  Boston,  the  tragedian  Macready 
played,  in  Boston,  and  Charles  took  her,  night  after  night,  to  see 
his  performances.  It  was  the  first  really  fine  acting  she  had 
seen  and  it  opened  to  her  the  wonderful  beauties  of  Shakespeare. 
She  never  forgot  the  debt  she  owed  him,  to  have  thus  opened  a 
new  world  of  delight.  He  had  met  and  dined  with  Macready, 
was  familiar  with  the  plays  and  enthusiastic  in  pointing  out 
the  excellences  in  the  interpretation  of  them.  Sumner  corre 
sponded  with  Macready  after  his  return  to  Europe. 

In  January  and  February  of  1814,  he  visited  his  brother 
Albert  in  New  York  and  spent  a  few  days  in  Philadelphia.  In 

108 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  109 

New  York  he  met  and  dined  with  Halleck,  Cogswell  and  Theo 
dore  Sedgwick  and  was  again  kindly  received  by  Chancellor 
Kent.  He  wrote  to  Hillard  that  he  had  "  had  some  pleasant 
dinners,  seen  some  handsome  women  and  been  to  two  balls." 
It  was  on  this  visit  to  New  York  that  he  became  acquainted 
with  three  sisters,  Misses  Ward,  who  lived  on  Bond  Street  near 
his  brother  Albert's  residence.  He  was  much  attracted  by  their 
wit  and  beauty  and  might  have  easily  conceived  a  tender  senti 
ment  for  one  of  them.  But  this,  his  circumstances,  poor  and  in 
debt,  with  little  income,  compelled  him  to  conceal.  They  were 
then  beautiful,  bright,  vivacious  girls,  fond  of  society  and  music, 
prettily  supporting  one  another,  in  their  sallies  of  wit  and 
laughter,  and  generally  the  centre  of  a  circle  of  admirers. 
"  The  Three  Graces  "  was  the  designation  they  acquired  with 
Sumner  and  his  friends.  They  were  daughters  of  Mr.  Samuel 
Ward,  a  banker  of  New  York.  Their  mother,  Julia  Kush  Ward 
was  the  author  of  some  poems  of  merit.  She  was  the  daughter 
of  Mr.  B.  C.  Cutler,  an  eminent  citizen  of  Boston. 

"  The  Three  Graces  "  spent  the  following  summer  in  Dor 
chester,  a  suburb  of  Boston.  Sumner  wrote  Lieber :  "  The 
three  Misses  Ward — a  lovely  triumvirate — are  summering  in 
Dorchester."  He  spent  much  time  in  their  company.  The 
following  September  he  was  again  in  New  York,  looking  up 
evidence  for  his  friction  match  case,  but  in  his  report  to  his 
partner  of  the  progress  he  was  making,  among  the  dusty  and 
dreary  records  of  the  clerk's  office,  he  quietly  mentions,  facts 
of  interest  to  him,  that  he  had  dined  with  Mr.  Samuel  Ward, 
his  first  day  there,  and  that  on  the  next  day  he  dined  with 
the  Misses  Ward ! 

And  how  all  roads  lead  to  New  York !  In  August,  1842,  he 
writes  to  Longfellow,  then  in  Europe :  "  I  have  been  away  on  a 
short  journey  with  my  two  sisters,  Mary  and  Julia,  and  have 
enjoyed  not  a  little  their  enjoyment  of  life  and  new  scenes. 
Howe  started  in  company.  We  went  to  Springfield;  thence 
made  an  excursion  to  Chicopee;  thence  to  Lenox  and  Stock- 
bridge,  where  I  left  the  girls  to  ramble  about,  while  Howe 
and  I  started  on  a  journey  to  New  York,  including  Hell 
Gate,  where  we  passed  the  chief  of  our  time.  The  '  Three 
Graces '  were  bland  and  lovely." 

Sumner  and  Dr.  Samuel  G.  Howe  were  fast  friends  then 
and  they  continued  so  for  many  years.  There  were  times  in 
Sumner's  life  when  Howe  was  his  greatest  confidant.  His 
opposition  to  slavery,  at  a  later  day,  estranged  many  of  his 
friends,  but  it  never  affected  Howe.  He  was  in  full  sym 
pathy  with  Sumner's  purpose  to  destroy  it  and  during  this 


110  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

period  their  friendship  continued,  more  cordial  than  before. 
In  1846  Howe  allowed  himself  to  be  nominated  for  Congress, 
by  the  opponents  of  slavery  and  the  Mexican  war,  when  there 
was  no  prospect  for  an  election. 

He  was  a  high-minded  man,  devoted  to  philanthropic  pur 
poses  and  pursuits  and  very  like  Sumner  in  many  of  his 
thoughts  of  life.  He  was  ten  years  Sumner's  senior.  In  his 
young  manhood,  he  had  spent  seven  years,  as  a  soldier  in  aid 
of  Greece,  in  her  struggle  against  the  Turks,  for  independence ; 
and  had  narrowly  escaped  death  from  one  of  their  scimeters. 
He  was  in  Paris  in  July,  1830,  on  his  way  home,  when  the 
French  people  rose  in  revolution  against  Charles  the  Tenth 
and  drove  him  from  his  throne.  Still  by  instinct  the  champion 
of  the  oppressed,  he  joined  the  cause  of  Lafayette  and  the 
people  against  the  arbitrary  rule  of  their  King.  His  dis 
regard  of  danger  attracted  the  attention  of  Lafayette,  who 
urged  him  not  to  expose  himself,  in  this  struggle  that  should 
be  reserved  for  Frenchmen,  but  to  save  his  life  for  the  aid 
of  his  own  country.  Reaching  home  he  studied  medicine  and 
quickly  rising  in  his  profession  he  was  made  Superintendent 
of  the  Boston  Institution  for  the  Blind.  He  devoted  himself 
to  this  work  with  his  characteristic  enthusiasm.  Beside 
his  work  for  his  own  Institution  he  visited  other  states  and 
sought  to  interest  them  in  the  establishment  of  similar  found 
ings. 

At  this  time  Sumner  and  Howe  were  much  in  each  other's  so 
ciety.  They  took  frequent  horseback  rides  and  made  excursions 
together  to  places  near  Boston.  Sumner  frequently  passed  the 
night  with  Howe  at  the  Institution  for  the  Blind,  where  they 
talked  far  into  the  nights,  of  European  travel,  of  books  and 
friends.  Two  years  later  Howe  married  Julia  Ward,  one  of 
the  "  Three  Graces."  Sumner's  friend  Crawford  married  an 
other.  The  third  became  Mrs.  Maillard.  Julia  Ward  Howe 
became  the  author  of  several  books,  "  Passion  Flowers ", 
"  Words  for  the  Hour  ",  a  volume  of  reminiscences.  Her  best 
known  poem  is  her  "  Battle  Hymn  of  the  Republic  ". 

This  hymn  has  since  been  set  to  music  and  is  now  sung  as 
one  of  our  national  anthems. 

Mrs.  Howe  was  no  less  firm  in  her  friendship  for  Sumner 
than  her  husband.  During  his  years  of  struggle  against 
slavery,  they  never  ceased  to  uphold  his  hands.  And  when 
Brooks  assaulted  him  in  the  Senate  Chamber  for  words  uttered 
in  his  speech  on  the  "  Crime  against  Kansas  w,  she  promptly 
condemned  the  outrage  in  a  poem  published  in  the  "  JSTew 
York  Tribune."  No  words  of  sympathy  came  to  Sumner 


LIFE 'OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  1J3 

more  welcome  than  hers.  When  he  published  the  complete 
edition  of  his  works  he  incorporated  this  poem  in  them  as  a 
note  to  the  speech. 

Howe  had  taken  the  place  in  the  "  Five  of  Clubs  "  made 
vacant  by  Cleveland,  who  was  wasting  away  with  disease  and 
soon  to  die.  The  Club  continued  its  meetings,  at  the  homes 
of  its  members.  They  met  to  talk  of  the  events  of  the  week, 
of  new  books  and  their  own  literary  projects  and  to  read  and 
discuss  a  poem  or  an  article  that  any  of  them  had  written  for 
the  press.  They  never  doubted  the  fidelity  of  the  members 
to  one  another  and  usually  asked  their  criticism  upon  their 
productions,  before  they  were  given  to  the  public.  The  meet 
ings  were  furnished  with  refreshments,  but  they  were  spar 
ingly  used.  Good  cheer  was  plenty.  They  were  bright  in 
telligent  men,  all  well  educated  and  capital  convergers.  The 
cheery  laugh  and  abounding  good  spirits  of  Felton  never 
failed  to  touch  a  responsive  chord  in  the  others.  Besides 
Sumner  and  his  partner  Hillard  there  were  Howe,  and  Felton, 
then  Professor  of  Greek  at  Harvard  and  afterwards  its 
President,  and  Henry  W.  Longfellow,  the  poet,  then  Harvard's 
Professor  of  Modern  Languages  and  Literature. 

Sumner  and  Longfellow  were  close  friends.  Longfellow  was 
born  at  Portland,  Maine,  the  son  of  an  attorney;  and  grad 
uated  at  Bowdoin.  After  graduation  he  had  commenced  the 
study  of  law  with  his  father,  but  being  called  to  a  professor 
ship  in  Bowdoin  he  had  fitted  himself  for  the  place,  by  three 
years  study  in  Europe.  In  1835,  he  was  called  to  Harvard. 
He  was  four  years  Simmer's  senior  and  still  unmarried.  He 
had.  his  rooms  in  the  house  in  Cambridge  then  owned  by  Mrs. 
Craigie,  fronting  on  the  road  from  Harvard  College  to  Mt. 
Auburn  Cemetery.  It  was  a  commodious  structure,  surrounded 
by  ample  grounds,  looking  out  upon  the  winding  river  Charles, 
with  Brighton  hills  and  Brookline  in  the  distance.  Even 
then  it  was  an  ancient  dwelling  and  like  an  old  man  gracing 
his  age,  with  the  honors  of  well-spent  years,  it  numbered  among 
its  claims  to  consideration  that  it  had  been  the  home  of 
Everett  the  orator,  Sparks  the  historian,  and  Worcester  the 
lexicographer,  and  the  additional  fact  that  it  was  the  head 
quarters  of  General  Washington  in  the  Revolutionary  War. 
Thither  Washington's  wife  had  come  to  visit  him,  properly 
attended  all  the  way  from  Virginia,  in  a  coach  drawn  by  four 
horses,  with  a  liveried  postilion  astride  of  each,  according 
to  the  elaborate  ceremonial  of  the  day.  And  there  Martha 
Washington,  with  her  inimitable  grace,  had  enlivened  the 
dreary  winter  of  1775-6,  by  dispensing  touches  of  Virginia 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

hospitality.  Longfellow  afterwards  purchased  the  house  and 
it  continued  to  be  his  home  for  the  remainder  of  his  life,  with 
his  name  and  fame  thus  adding  another  attraction  to  the 
place. 

From  this  house  Sumner  wrote  his  brother  George,  still 
in  Europe,  in  1841 :  "  It  is  Sunday  and  I  am  Longfellow's 
guest.  One  of  my  pleasures  is  of  a  Saturday  afternoon  to 
escape  from  Boston  and  find  shelter  here.  We  dine  late,  say 
between  five  and  six  o'clock.  Felton  adds  to  the  hilarity. 
We  talk  of  what  we  have  seen  abroad,  of  cities  visited,  persons 
seen,  and  the  trophies  of  art  and  of  old  time,  while  all  the 
poets  and  masters,  in  all  the  languages,  are  at  hand  in 
Longfellow's  well  chosen  library.  I  think  you  never  knew 
my  friend.  When  you  return  (if  that  event  ever  takes  place) 
you  will  find  great  satisfaction  and  sympathy  in  his  society." 

After  Sumner's  return  from  Europe,  he  became  more 
intimate  with  Longfellow  than  he  had  been.  Longfellow  had 
travelled  and  studied  in  Europe  and  while  he  cared  little  for 
law  and  less  for  politics,  and  statistics  about  war  and  the 
conduct  of  prisons,  subjects  which  were  attracting  Sumner's 
attention,  both  friends  were  enthusiastic  over  art  and  literature. 
They  delighted  to  sit  together  and  talk  over  some  gallery  of 
pictures  or  the  works  they  had  seen  of  some  old  master  and 
together  revive  their  recollections  of  them.  Here  a  library  of 
old  books  and  there  a  road,  a  river  or  some  mountain  fastness, 
which  each  had  seen,  was  recalled  as  an  afterglow  of  European 
travel.  Longfellow,  with  more  settled  purpose  than  Sumner, 
was  then  far  advanced  in  his  literary  career.  He  had  already 
published  his  "  Hyperion  "  and  "  Voices  of  the  Night "  and 
some  translations  from  Spanish  poetry.  But  Sumner  at  this 
time,  with  little  prospect  of  professional  or  political  distinction, 
was  only  beginning  to  turn  his  thoughts  towards  literature. 
Books  and  magazines  constantly  furnished  new  topics  of  con 
versation. 

Sumner's  Saturday  visits  to  the  "  Craigie  House "  were 
frequently  extended  over  Sundays,  their  employments  keeping 
them  apart,  during  the  other  days  of  the  week.  His  tall  portly 
form,  swinging  easily  up  the  walk,  among  the  shrubbery,  is 
still  remembered.  He  always  found  a  welcome,  and  his  sister 
Julia  recalled  that  he  occasionally  came  home,  bringing  a  new 
poem  from  Longfellow's  pen,  which  he  read  to  them  with  fine 
effect,  for  he  read  poetry  well. 

In  1843  Longfellow  married  Fanny  Appleton,  the  "Mary 
Ashburton  "  of  his  "  Hyperion  ",  a  lady  of  great  sweetness  and 
elevation  of  character  as  well  as  beauty  of  person.  She  was 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  113 

the  daughter  of  Nathan  Appleton,  twice  a  Member  of  Congress, 
from  Boston.  Her  stepmother  was  a  second  cousin  of  Sumner. 
And  thus  the  tie  between  Sumner  and  Longfellow  was  strength 
ened  by  the  event  which  so  often  separates  bachelor  friends. 
Sumner  was  present  at  their  wedding.  With  her  character 
istic  sweetness  of  disposition,  the  new  wife  sought  to  keep  green 
her  husband's  bachelor  friendship.  Soon  after  the  marriage 
Sumner  wrote :  "  At  Craigie  Castle,  the  Longfellows  dispense 
an  easy  and  graceful  hospitality, — always  glad  to  enjoy  the 
society  of  their  friends  at  dinner  or  tea  as  it  may  happen."  So 
"  Craigie  House "  continued  for  Sumner  a  retreat  where  he 
went  to  find  rest  from  the  vexations  of  his  long  days  of  service. 

Another  house  that  Sumner  often  visited  during  these  years 
was  the  home  of  William  H.  Prescott,  the  historian.  Sumner 
had  never  met  Prescott  before  going  to  Europe,  but  while  there 
the  history  of  "  Ferdinand  and  Isabella "  appeared.  It  at 
tracted  attention  in  the  circles  where  Sumner  moved.  He  was 
enthusiastic  in  his  admiration  of  it  and  took  occasion  fre 
quently  to  recommend  it  to  friends  and  interested  himself  in 
having  it  reviewed  favorably  in  England.  His  letters  to  friends 
at  home  frequently  referred  to  its  success  and  some  of  these 
being  shown  to  Prescott  he  had  been  led  to  acknowledge  Sum- 
ner's  kindness.  An  acquaintance  followed  Sumner's  return  to 
Boston,  which  afterwards  ripened  into  a  warm  friendship. 

The  Prescott  family  united  three  generations  under  one 
roof,  Judge  Prescott  and  his  wife  and  their  son  William  H. 
Prescott,  and  his  wife  and  two  children.  Judge  Prescott,  the 
son  of  General  Prescott  of  Battle  of  Bunker  Hill  fame,  had  been 
a  member  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts,  when  Sum- 
ner's  father  was  Sheriff.  He  was  an  eminent  lawyer  and  judge, 
as  well  as  a  citizen  distinguished  in  private  life  for  his  learn 
ing,  his  good  sense  and  his  uprightness.  He  was  now  verging 
upon  eighty  years  of  age,  but  still  in  the  enjoyment  of  good 
health;  and  he  continued,  with  almost  unabated  interest  in 
events  around  him,  till  stricken  with  paralysis,  shortly  before 
his  death,  in  1844. 

William  H.  Prescott,  Sumner's  friend  was  a  genial,  warm 
hearted  man,  scholarly  in  his  tastes,  full  of  kindness  and  con 
sideration  for  the  feelings  of  others,  willing  to  do  a  favor  or 
suffer  an  inconvenience,  above  little  considerations  of  self  and 
incapable  of  meanness.  After  graduating  at  Harvard  he  had 
entered  upon  the  study  of  law,  but,  with  an  intervening  trip  to 
Europe,  he  abandoned  it  for  the  pursuit  of  literature  which, 
notwithstanding  an  impaired  vision,  owing  to  the  total  loss  of 
one  eye  and  organic  weakness  in  the  other,  he  pursued  with 


114  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

signal  success.  Reflecting  upon  his  career,  was  influencing 
Sumner  to  think  of  a  similar  one  for  himself. 

Sumner  was  fond  of  the  Prescotts  and  was  in  the  habit  of 
calling  there  on  Sunday  evenings,  frequently,  at  such  times, 
supping  with  the  family.  They  were  attached  to  him.  His 
want  of  affectation,  his  love  of  knowledge  and  his  good  sense 
quickly  found  a  response  in  such  natures  as  the  Prescotts', 
father  and  son.  They  invited  him  to  their  family  parties, 
where  he  met  Franklin  Dexter,  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Boston 
bar,  and  his  wife,  a  daughter  of  Judge  Prescott.  Sumner's 
presence  on  such  occasions  seemed  to  impose  no  restraint  on 
the  others.  He  joined  heartily  in  the  amusements  of  the  hour, 
played  "  blind  man's  buff  ",  etc. 

Sumner  was  prompt  to  acknowledge  this  kindness  of  the  Pres 
cotts.  When  Lord  Morpeth  visited  Boston  in  1841,  William 
H.  Prescott  was  one  of  the  select  number  invited  to  meet  him 
at  Longfellow's  rooms  the  evening  of  his  arrival.  This  recep 
tion  was  arranged  for  by  Sumner  and  Longfellow  together. 
When  Sumner  afterwards  gave  a  dinner,  in  his  honor,  at  the 
"  Tremont  House  "9  Prescott  was  again  one  of  the  guests.  He 
liked  Morpeth  and  after  that  assisted  Sumner  in  entertaining 
him.  And  when  he  left  Boston,  Sumner  and  Prescott  attended 
him  to  the  railroad  station  to  bid  him  good-bye. 

In  the  spring  of  1842,  Sumner  and  Prescott  visited  New 
York  together.  Prescott  went  to  visit  Washington  Irving  and 
invited  Sumner  to  accompany  him.  He  and  Irving,  each  with 
out  the  knowledge  of  the  other,  had  been  engaged  the  previous 
fall  and  winter,  in  writing  upon  the  "  Conquest  of  Mexico  ". 
They  had  before  trenched  upon  one  another's  ground,  Irving 
in  his  "  Life  of  Columbus  "  and  Prescott  in  his  "  Ferdinand 
and  Isabella  ".  Discovering  that  they  were  about  to  do  so 
again,  Irving  generously  gave  up  the  theme  to  Prescott  and 
furnished  him  what  materials  he  had  already  gathered.  Irving 
having  been  lately  nominated  and  confirmed  Minister  from  the 
United  States  to  Spain,  Prescott  desired  to  see  him  before  his 
departure  on  his  mission,  to  interest  him  in  procuring  some 
materials  for  this  history,  from  the  Spanish  archives.  The 
visit  was  a  delightful  one.  Sumner  and  Prescott  both  came 
back  full  of  the  praises  of  Irving  and  the  reception  he  gave 
them.  Each  was  disposed  to  rally  the  other  upon  his  enthu 
siasm,  over  their  host,  and  the  sayings  and  doings  to  which  they 
had  been  parties.  Sumner  insisted  that  Prescott  was  fairly 
"  Boz-ed  " — a  word  that  had  lately  been  coined  to  express  the 
enthusiasm  created  by  Dickens  on  his  recent  tour  in  the  United 
States. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Through  Prescott,  Sumner  became  acquainted  with  other 
authors,  George  Bancroft,  Jared  Sparks  and  George  Ticknor. 
Bancroft  had  just  issued  the  third  volume  of  his  history  of 
the  United  States.  He  was  Collector  of  the  Port  at  Boston, 
at  the  time,  and  a  Democrat.  Boston,  under  the  influence  of 
such  leaders  as  Webster,  John  Quincy  Adams,  Choate  and 
Everett,  was  strongly  Whig ;  and  to  be  a  Democrat  there,  meant 
to  be,  in  a  measure,  ostracized.  Even  George  Bancroft  did  not 
altogether  escape  this  ban,  though,  from  his  literary  eminence, 
he  might  reasonably  have  hoped  to  do  so.  But  Sumner  was 
not  much  in  politics  then  and  did  not  let  such  considerations 
influence  his  friendships.  Bancroft  frequently  dropped  into 
Hillard  and  Sumner's  office  to  chat  and  there  he  always  found 
a  welcome  and  congenial  company,  Hillard,  his  partner,  and 
William  W.  Story,  their  student,  were  hardly  behind  Sumner, 
in  their  love  for  good  books. 

Their  office  was  an  attractive  place.  Story  reveals  how  their 
thoughts,  "  when  business  would  allow,  sometimes  when  it 
would  not  allow,"  would  steal  away  from  the  law  to  revel  in  talk 
of  poetry  and  fiction  and  history  and  how  they  delighted  in 
anecdotes  about  some  old  judge,  or  the  bar,  some  great  argu 
ment  or  celebrated  trial, — the  literature  of  the  law  rather  than 
the  law  itself.  They  enjoyed  the  rich  conversation  of  Choate 
and  Dexter  and  Judge  Story,  and  of  old  Jeremiah  Mason, 
Webster's  great  rival  at  the  bar,  blunt,  hard-headed,  full  of 
rich  experiences  of  former  days  on  the  New  Hampshire  cir 
cuits.  Those  were  delightful  days  to  which  their  thoughts  af 
terwards  often  reverted.  They  all  had  a  taste  for  literature. 
Two  of  them  afterwards  abandoned  the  law,  Story  for  liter 
ature  and  sculpture,  and  Sumner  for  public  life.  Story,  in 
1847,  published  his  "  Treatise  on  the  Law  of  Sales  "  which  he 
dedicated  to  Sumner. 

The  first  sentence  of  quaint  introduction,  read,  like  a  vale 
dictory  to  the  law.  "  Sir  Edward  Coke,  in  the  preface  to  the 
eighth  part  of  his  Reports  says :  ( As  naturalists  say  that  there 
is  no  kind  of  fowl  of  the  wood,  or  of  the  plain,  that  doth  not 
bring  somewhat  to  the  building  of  the  Eagle's  nest — some  cin 
namon,  or  things  of  price,  some  juniper  or  thing  of  lesser  value ; 
so  ought  every  man,  according  to  his  power,  place  and  capacity, 
to  bring  something  to  the  adorning  of  our  great  Eagle's  nest, 
our  own  dear  country ; '  and  these  presents  I  have  brought  to 
that  great  Eagle's  nest,  the  law/' 

A  year  after  the  publication  of  this  book,  Story  went  to  Italy 
to  live  and  that  continued  to  be  his  home.  He  published  the 
"Life  and  Letters"  of  his  father,  Judge  Story,  and  two  yok 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

umes  of  poems,  besides  some  minor  works.  But  he  is  best 
known  as  a  sculptor.  His  statues  of  his  father  and  Chief  Jus 
tice  Marshall  and  some  of  his  imaginative  pieces  take  a  high 
rank.  He  died  in  Italy  in  1895  surviving  Sumner  more  than 
twenty-one  years. 

Another  American  artist  whose  friendship  Sumner  enjoyed, 
during  this  period  was  Washington  Allston.  He  lived  in  Cam 
bridge  and  was  a  graduate  of  Harvard,  but  had  studied  art  in 
Italy  and  France.  While  in  Europe  he  had  become  acquainted 
with  Wordsworth  and  Coleridge  and,  when  Sumner  went  to 
England,  he  commended  him  to  these  friends.  After  Sumner's 
return,  he  was  frequently  at  Allston's  house  and  was  much  in 
terested  in  his  work  as  an  artist.  In  all  his  efforts  to  aid  Craw 
ford  and  in  raising  the  subscription  for  the  purchase  of  the 
"  Orpheus  ",  Sumner  constantly  consulted  Allston,  who  heartily 
seconded  his  plans.  He  counted  on  his  aid  in  mounting  it  and 
in  arranging  the  exhibition  of  Crawford's  works,  but,  before  the 
"  Orpheus  "  arrived,  Allston  was  dead.  Sumner  commemorated 
him  in  his  oration  delivered  before  the  "  Phi  Beta  Society  "  of 
Harvard  in  1846,  on  "  The  Scholar,  the  Jurist,  the  Artist  and 
the  Philanthropist ",  one  of  the  most  finished  productions  of 
his  life. 

Sumner  had  an  acquaintance  with  Daniel  Webster  and  John 
Quincy  Adams.  They  were  Boston  men  and  he  therefore  had 
abundant  opportunity  to  see  them  in  private  and  hear  them  in 
public  and  to  be  familiar  with  their  careers,  which  during  the 
closing  years  of  Webster's  life,  especially  after  his  speech  on 
the  Seventh  of  March,  1850,  were  the  subject  of  much  discus 
sion  and  comparison.  Sumner's  frequent  allusions  to  them  in 
his  letters  show  that  he  was  observing  these  great  men  carefully. 
He  always  admired  the  great  intellect  and  the  grand  presence 
and  magnificent  oratory  of  Webster,  never  equalled  in  modern 
times.  But  he  thought  Webster  tacked  too  much  on  the  ques 
tion  of  slavery  and  lacked  moral  strength.  He  did  not  like 
Adams'  apparent  disregard  of  parliamentary  forms  in  Congress, 
but  he  delighted  in  the  moral  courage  of  the  man,  as  he  stood, 
year  after  year,  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  defying  slavery  and 
defending  the  right  of  the  people  to  petition  their  Representa 
tives.  His  opponents  sought  to  deny  the  right  of  petition,  by 
preventing  those  against  slavery  being  either  read  or  discussed 
in  Congress.  Sumner's  letters,  even  thus  early,  show  that  much 
as  he  admired  Webster,  he  admired  Adams  more.  Later  in  life 
he  came  to  know  both  of  these  men  better.  He  saw  them,  con 
versed  with  them  and  letters  were  exchanged,  upon  such  sub 
jects  as  are  likely  to  bring  a  constituent  in  contact  with  his 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  117 

Representatives,  but  his  relation  to  them  could  never  be  called 
intimate. 

The  man  who  more  than  any  other,  at  this  time,  influenced 
Sumner's  views  upon  public  questions  was  William  E.  Chan- 
iiing,  the  Philanthropist  commemorated  in  Sumner's  Phi  Beta 
Kappa  oration.  He  was  by  profession  a  minister,  but  is  much 
better  known  as  a  writer  upon  moral  questions.  After  grad 
uating  from  Harvard,  in  the  class  with  Judge  Story,  he  had 
spent  some  time  as  a  tutor  in  a  private  family  in  Virginia. 
Here  and  on  a  visit  later  to  the  West  India  Islands  he  had  an 
opportunity  to  observe  slavery  in  practice  and  he  became  un 
alterably  opposed  to  it.  He  was  outspoken  in  his  opposition, 
condemned  it  in  public  addresses  and  wrote  a  book,  the  most 
extensive  published  work  of  his  life,  setting  out  his  objections 
to  it.  He  had  also  studied  the  question  of  peace  and  war  and 
took  the  same  position  upon  this  subject  that  Sumner  after 
wards  did  in  his  oration  on  "  The  True  Grandeur  of  Nations  ". 
The  high  ethical  ground  that  Channing  assumed  and  the  elo 
quence  and  fearlessness  with  which  he  sustained  his  views  made 
a  lasting  impression.  He  died,  in  1842,  cut  off  in  the  full  tide 
of  usefulness,  at  sixty-two  years  of  age.  His  last  public  appear 
ance  was  to  make  an  address  to  the  citizens  of  Lenox,  Massa 
chusetts,  on  the  occasion  of  celebrating  the  anniversary  of 
British  emancipation  in  the  West  Indies. 

Sumner  had  known  Channing  for  years.  Notwithstanding 
the  disparity  in  their  ages  they  had  been  intimate  friends  and 
had  many  points  of  likeness.  They  were  both  well  educated, 
graduates  of  the  same  college  and  both  had  a  strong  taste  for 
literary  pursuits.  They  both  cared  little  for  wealth,  but  had  a 
generous  ambition  to  be  useful  men.  Each  felt  a  deep  interest 
in  their  common  country,  a  pride  in  her  hard  beginning  and 
her  growing  power  and  yet  neither  could  be  said  then  to  belong 
to  any  political  party.  Doubtless  they  both  voted  the  Whig 
ticket,  but  with  no  enthusiasm  and  without  any  effort  to  give 
direction  to  the  votes  of  others.  Channing  had  a  fascination 
for  young  men.  He  appealed  to  conscience,  pointed  out  a  great 
future  for  them  and  an  ideal  life,  motives  for  action  generally 
stronger  in  young  men  than  in  those  of  advanced  years. 

When  he  died,  Sumner  characterized  him  as  "  one  of  the 
purest,  brightest,  greatest  minds  of  his  age  ".  And  he  added : 
"  He  has  been  my  friend  and  I  may  almost  say  idol,  for  nearly 
ten  years.  For  this  period  I  have  enjoyed  his  confidence  in 
no  common  way.  Both  his  last  treatises  he  read  to  me  in  manu 
script  and  asked  my  advice  with  regard  to  their  publication, 
and  mv  criticism." 


118  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Speaking  of  his  eloquence  four  years  later,  Sumner  said: 
"With  few  of  the  physical  attributes  belonging  to  the  o'rator, 
he  was  an  orator  of  surpassing  grace.  His  soul  tabernacled  in 
a  body  that  was  little  more  than  a  filament  of  clay.  He  was 
small  in  stature ;  but  when  he  spoke,,  his  person  seemed  to  dilate 
with  the  majesty  of  his  thoughts.  *  *  *  His  voice  was  soft  and 
musical,  not  loud  or  full  in  tone;  and  yet,  like  conscience,  it 
made  itself  heard  in  the  inmost  chambers  of  the  soul.  His 
eloquence  was  gentleness  and  persuasion,  reasoning  for  relig 
ion,  humanity  and  justice.  *  *  *  His  eloquence  had  not  the 
character  and  fashion  of  forensic  effort  or  parliamentary  debate. 
It  mounted  above  these,  into  an  atmosphere  unattempted  by 
the  applauded  orators  of  the  world.  Whenever  he  spoke  or 
wrote,  it  was  with  the  loftiest  purpose,  as  his  works  attest, — 
not  for  public  display,  not  to  advance  himself,  not  on  any  ques 
tion  of  pecuniary  interest,  not  under  any  worldly  temptation, 
but  to  promote  the  love  of  God  and  man.  Here  are  untried 
founts  of  truest  inspiration.  Eloquence  has  been  called  action; 
but  it  is  something  more.  It  is  that  divine  and  ceaseless  energy, 
which  saves  and  helps  mankind.  It  cannot  assume  its  highest 
form  in  personal  pursuit  of  dishonest  guardians  or  selfish  con 
tentions  for  a  crown,  not  in  defence  of  a  murderer,  or  invective 
hurled  at  a  conspirator.  I  would  not  overstep  the  proper  mod 
esty  of  this  discussion,  nor  would  I  disparage  the  genius  of  the 
great  masters ;  but  all  must  join  in  admitting  that  no  rhetorical 
skill  or  oratorical  power  can  elevate  these  lower,  earthly  things 
to  the  natural  heights  on  which  Channing  stood,  when  he 
pleaded  for  Freedom  and  Peace." 

These  passages  are  valuable  as  revealing  the  direction  of  Sum- 
ner's  thoughts  and  studies  at  this  time.  They  show  his  near 
ness  to  Channing  and  his  familiarity  with  the  great  orators  of 
other  days,  Demosthenes,  Webster  and  Burke,  and  that  he  was 
reflecting  upon  their  speeches  and  the  true  springs  of  eloquence. 
It  will  be  seen  hereafter  how  much  the  eloquence  of  Adams  and 
Channing  became  models  for  Sumner.  In  his  best  efforts  in 
public  life,  as  his  "  Freedom,  National ;  Slavery,  Sectional ",  or 
the  "  Crime  against  Kansas  ",  the  fearless  pugnacity  of  Adams 
unites  with  the  high  ethical  tone  of  Channing  and  both  upon 
the  Senate  and  the  country  they  made  an  impression  that  has 
rarely  been  equalled.  Sumner  united  some  of  the  distinguish 
ing  traits  of  both  these  men.  He  was  as  scholarly  in  his  tastes 
and  as  carefully  educated  as  either  of  them.  He  was  hardly 
less  industrious,  though  a  man  of  less  method,  than  Adams.  He 
knew  no  fear ;  when  he  had  resolved  that  a  course  was  right,  he 
dared  to  pursue  it.  Even  John  Quincy  Adams  never  stood  be- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  119 

Tore  the  slave  power  and  dealt  such  blows  as  Sumner  in  his 
speech  on  the  "  Crime  against  Kansas  "  and  Channing  never 
lashed  the  dogs  of  War  as  Sumner  did  in  his  "  True  Grandeur 
of  Nations  "  delivered  before  the  city  authorities  and  people  of 
Boston.  Still  it  was  the  work  of  both  these  men  that  fell,  in 
large  measure,  to  Sumner.,  after  they  were  gone.  He  took  it  up 
and  never  faltered. 

Sumner  saw  the  work  of  Adams  in  Congress,  after  he  left  the 
White  House,  without  a  parallel,  in  American  history.  Adams 
then  had  all  the  benefit  of  his  great  learning  and  experience, 
and  the  prestige,  his  reputation  for  both  gave  him,  and  yet, 
having  filled  the  highest  places,  he  came  to  this  later  work,  un- 
warped  by  any  ambition  for  promotion.  He  unselfishly  de 
voted  what  was  left  of  his  life,  eighteen  years  of  unremitted 
effort,  to  the  cause  of  universal  freedom  and  his  country's  ad 
vancement.  This  was  a  unique  object  lesson.  Channing  upon 
another  stage,  but  with  scarcely  less  singleness  of  purpose,  de 
voted  himself  to  the  same  causes.  He  was  more  an  idealist  than 
Adams.  His  training  had  made  him  so ;  and  he  was  so  by  con 
stitution.  They  both  supported  one  another.  Adams,  from 
his  place  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  fought  their  common 
fight  before  the  nation.  But  could  he  have  maintained  his 
place  in  Congress  to  make  this  fight,  during  the  long  years  he 
did,  if  some  one  as  eloquent  as  Channing  had  not  advocated 
that  cause  in  Boston?  Sumner  was  in  a  position  where  he 
could  see  and  appreciate  the  work  of  both.  He  was  nearer  to 
Channing  and  more  intimate  with  him,  felt  his  work  more,  but 
he  admired  the  larger  influence  of  Adams  from  his  higher  place. 

When  Channing's  manuscripts  were  submitted  to  Sumner, 
he  was  glad  to  aid  him  with  criticisms  or  suggestions.  Sum 
ner  was  always  interested  in  the  literary  projects  of  his  friends. 
No  kindlier  encouragement  came  to  Hillard  upon  his  literary 
efforts  than  Sumner  extended.  He  delivered  the  Phi  Beta 
Kappa  oration  at  Harvard  on  August  24,  1843,  and  the  week 
before  we  find  Sumner  writing  his  friend  George  W.  Greene, 
at  home  from  his  consulate  at  Rome,  urging  him  to  be  present 
and  promising  him  something  "  refined  and  brilliant  in  the 
audience  and  the  orator  ".  After  it  was  delivered  and  printed, 
we  find  him  writing  to  Howe,  then  absent,  that  they  were  "  all 
surrounded  by  Hillard's  glory  ".  "  His  oration  has  been  pub 
lished;  and  the  press  and  all  who  read  it  express  the  warmest 
admiration,"  etc.  A  new  poem  from  Longfellow's  pen  he 
heralded  to  his  friends  as  an  occasion  to  be  anticipated.  Long 
fellow,  Lieber,  Prescott  and  Bancroft  were  then  in  the  full  tide 
of  authorship.  Sumner  saw  most  that  all  of  them  wrote  during 


120  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

these  years,  before  it  reached  the  public.  He  was  disposed  like 
his  father  to  say  agreeable  things  to  others.  He  was  the  last  of 
men  to  wound  any  one's  feelings  by  criticism  needlessly  severe. 
This  trait,  with  his  generosity  of  time  in  assisting  his  friends 
in  any  way  they  asked  and  his  good  judgment  in  literary  mat 
ters  led  them  to  consult  him  freely  in  their  work.  He  took  the 
kindest  interest,  criticised  proofs,  wrote  reviews  and  gave  them 
references  from  his  own  readings  and  sometimes  made  searches 
in  the  libraries  for  matter  for  them.  To  Lieber,  especially,  who 
was  teaching  in  the  South,  where  he  did  not  have  access  to 
large  collections  of  books,  it  was  an  advantage  he  appreciated 
to  have  such  a  friend  as  Sumner  in  Boston. 

For  the  company  of  his  friends,  in  a  social  way,  Sumner's 
fondness  continued.  He  enjoyed  good  living  with  moderation, 
and  frequently  with  Howe  or  some  other  dropped  into  a  cafe, 
in  the  evening  after  the  day's  work  was  done  and  took  some  re 
freshment,  ices,  strawberries  or  oysters  in  season  and  occasion 
ally  a  glass  of  hock  or  claret,  thus  mingling  good  fare  and  good 
talk  with  the  news  of  the  day.  It  was  still  the  society  of  gentle 
men.  Strong  drinks  he  did  not  use.  Saloons  he  did  not  visit. 
For  any  exhibition  of  drunkenness  or  an  approach  to  it  in  con 
dition  he  always  had  the  utmost  disgust.  In  his  case  it  was  the 
survival  of  the  European  or  English  habit  as  he  had  grown 
familiar  with  it  abroad,  in  the  best  circles,  of  using  a  light 
stimulant  of  wine  in  the  same  way  as  tea  and  coffee,  or  a  cup 
of  cocoa.  It  was  still  the  England  of  Johnson  and  Goldsmith 
and  Garrick,  with  the  coffee-house  and  light  table-talk,  surviv 
ing,  that  he  enjoyed. 

Upon  his  return  from  Europe,  he  had  taken  the  place  in  the 
Society  of  the  Cincinnati,  formerly  filled  by  his  grandfather 
and  now  made  vacant  by  the  death  of  his  father.  The  Society 
was  originally  founded  in  1783  by  the  officers  of  the  American 
army  of  the  Revolutionary  War  for  patriotic  and  benevolent 
purposes.  Major  Job  Sumner,  the  grandfather,  was  the  orig 
inal  member,  then  the  father  and  now  by  his  death  Charles, 
being  the  oldest  son,  was  entitled  to  the  succession.  He  at 
tended  its  annual  banquet.  The  rank  appealed  to  his  pride  in 
a  career  of  honorable  service.  But  with  the  Brook  Farm  com 
munity,  headed  by  George  Ripley,  he  does  not  seem  to  have  felt 
much  sympathy.  His  younger  brother  Horace  was  at  one  time 
a  member  of  this  band  of  social  reformers.  Charles  rather 
humorously  wrote :  "  Horace  has  commenced  as  a  farmer.  He 
is  with  Mr.  Eipley  eight  miles  from  Boston.  He  picks  to 
matoes,  cucumbers,  beans,  upsets  a  barrel  of  potatoes,  cleans 
away  chips,  studies  agriculture,  rakes  hay  in  a  meadow  and  is 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  121 

pleased  with  his  instructors  and  associates."  Yet  it  was  a  nat 
ural  craving  for  companionship  in  the  case  of  both  brothers 
that  led  them  into  these  organizations. 

Sumner  was  beginning  to  feel  his  lonely  position.  His 
friends  Cleveland,  Hillard,  Longfellow,  Howe,  Prescott,  those 
with  whom  he  was  most  intimate  were  now  all  married  and 
gathered  about  firesides  of  their  own.  Sumner  frequently 
dropped  in  among  them  and  shared  their  homes  and  seemed  to 
rejoice  in  their  happiness.  And  yet  we  know  it  was  not  without 
a  vein  of  sadness.  Of  one  of  his  friends  he  wrote :  "  I  think 
he  will  be  married  very  soon.  What  then  will  become  of  me? 
It  is  a  dreary  world  to  travel  in  alone."  To  Crawford :  "  Long 
fellow  is  most  happily  married,  I  am  most  unhappily  single/' 
To  Lieber ;  "  Longfellow  is  to  be  happy  for  a  fortnight  in  the 
shades  of  Cambridge;  then  to  visit  his  wife's  friends  in  Berk 
shire  ;  then  his  own  in  Portland.  I  am  all  alone, — alone.  My 
friends  fall  away  from  me."  To  Lieber  again,  three  months 
later,  Oct.  6,  1843 ;  "  I  am  more  and  more  desolate  and  alone. 
I  wish  you  and  your  dear  wife  lived  here.  You  would  allow 
me  to  enter  your  house  and  be  at  home ;  to  recline  on  the  sofa, 
and  play  the  part  of  a  friend  in  the  house.  I  lead  a  joyless 
life,  with  very  little  sympathy."  We  might  quote  farther,  ex 
pressions  of  the  same  kind,  but  these  are  sufficient.  That  same 
month  William  W.  Story  was  married.  The  question  is  natur 
ally  asked ;  why  did  not  Sumner  marry  at  this  time  in  his  life  ? 
He  was  a  refined,  companionable  man,  of  pure  life  and  good 
habits,  fond  of  the  pleasures  of  taste  and  society  and  was  well 
qualified  to  do  his  part  towards  making  a  happy  home.  How 
ever  it  may  have  been  at  other  periods,  at  this  he  enjoyed  the 
society  of  young  ladies.  It  would  have  been  natural  for  him 
to  join  his  fortunes  to  those  of  some  of  the  accomplished  young 
women  he  met. 

His  circumstances  undoubtedly  had  much  to  do  with  pre 
venting  it.  The  general  practice  of  the  law,  without  a  fixed  sal 
ary  from  some  company  or  other  employer,  furnishes  to  a  young 
practitioner,  at  best,  a  precarious  income.  'Though  the  end  of 
the  year  shows  fees  earned,  he  could  not  generally  have  fore 
told,  at  its  beginning,  where  they  were  to  come  from, — a  con 
dition  not  very  encouraging  to  a  young  man  contemplating 
matrimony.  Sumner's  trip  to  Europe  had  interrupted  his  pro 
fessional  career,  consumed  all  his  savings  and  left  him  about 
five  thousand  dollars  in  debt.  This  debt  continued  unpaid  for 
several  years.  This  shows  that  he  was  not  making  money  rap 
idly.  His  father's  will,  by  leaving  all  the  property  to  his  mother 
for  life  left  him  with  no  improvement  of  his  fortunes  from  that 


122  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

source.  He  felt  poor  and  with  his  pride  and  sensitiveness, 
shrank  from  asking  another  to  share  such  a  home  as  he  could 
furnish. 

His  ambition  too,  had  its  influence.  He  purposed  to  achieve 
an  honorable  position  and  leave  something  behind  him  that 
would  be  worthy  of  remembrance.  And  to  accomplish  this  he 
was  willing  to  sacrifice  much  of  his  own  personal  comfort  and 
happiness.  It  is  certain  that  while  his  mother  lived  he  did  not 
feel  the  want  of  a  home  as  he  might  have  done.  He  was  de 
voted  to  her  and  she  to  him.  His  father  was  dead,  his  brothers 
were  gone  and  he  was  left  to  take  their  places,  with  his  sisters, 
in  the  family  circle.  But  this  was  not  to  last  always.  When 
later  Mary  and  his  mother  were  dead,  and  Julia  was  married 
and  gone,  and  he  was  left  alone,  to  encounter  sickness  and 
broken  political  friendships  and  the  hard  lines  of  public  life, 
then,  but  not  till  then,  was  the  cup  of  his  loneliness  to  be  full. 
This  of  course  he  could  not  then  foresee,  but  he  did  feel  that 
the  mother  and  sisters,  in  their  lonely  position,  had  claims  upon 
him  which  he  could  not  disregard,  either  by  bringing  another 
into  the  home  or  by  severing  himself  from  it. 


CHAPTER   XII 

INTERNATIONAL   QUESTIONS "THE   CAROLINE" — "THE  CREOLE" 

SLAVERY     AGAIN THE     "  SOMERS  "     MUTINY SERVICES 

FOR  EDUCATION AT  THE  LAW  SCHOOL EDITS  VESEY  JR. 

SICKNESS — HIS  SISTER  MARY^S  DEATH — AT  WORK  AGAIN 

THERE  were  grave  questions  of  international  law  arising  be 
tween  the  United  States  and  England  during  the  years  1841-3, 
in  which  Sumner  took  an  interest.  During  the  years  1835~7, 
preceding  his  trip  to  Europe,  he  had  given  instruction  in  the 
Law  School  on  the  Law  of  Nations.  The  first  volume  of 
"  Kent's  Commentaries  "  was  used  as  a  textbook  but  with  his 
customary  fulness  of  preparation  he  had  studied  the  subject 
widely  in  other  authors.  The  knowledge  of  the  subject  thus 
acquired  made  international  questions  of  peculiar  interest  to 
him  afterwards. 

A  quick  succession  of  perplexing  questions  had  made  war 
imminent  between  the  United  States  and  England.  In  1837 
there  had  arisen  a  rebellion  in  Canada.  It  was  suppressed,  but 
the  rebels  sought  refuge  in  New  York,  just  across  the  Niagara 
river.  There  they  found  support  and  encouragement  and  made 
accessions  to  their  numbers.  They  procured  a  vessel  called  the 
"  Caroline  ",  in  which  they  made  incursions  and  carried  sup 
plies  from  Navy  Island,  in  the  Niagara  river,  to  their  friends 
in  Canada.  Some  Canadians  finally  determined  to  destroy  this 
vessel  and  for  this  purpose  crossed  over  to  Navy  Island,  which 
was  British  territory,  where  they  expected  to  find  the  vessel 
at  her  accustomed  anchorage.  But  on  reaching  Navy  Island, 
they  found  she  was  not  there  but  was  moored  to  the  American 
shore  and  outside  the  British  boundaries.  They,  however,  per 
severed  in  their  purpose  of  destruction  and  boarding  her  there 
cut  her  loose  from  the  shore,  fired  her  and  turned  her  adrift, 
when  she  floated  over  the  falls  and  was  lost.  In  the  melee,  one 
man,  named  Durfree  was  killed,  by  the  assailants. 

In  1840,  Alexander  McLeod  came  from  Canada  to  New  York 
and  in  a  blatant  moment,  boasted  that  he  had  been  in  the  in 
cursion  that  destroyed  the  "  Caroline "  and  that  he  was  the 
slayer  of  Durfree.  He  was  at  once  arrested  and  was  afterwards 
indicted  for  murder.  Pending  his  trial,  the  British  govern 
ment  interfered  and  demanded  his  release  and  assumed  the 

123 


124  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

responsibility  for  the  invasion,  justifying  it  as  necessary  for  the 
protection  of  her  territory.  She  insisted  that  McLeod  could 
not  be  held  to  answer  for  an  act  committed  under  the  authority 
of  his  country  any  more  than  a  soldier  could  be  tried  for  mur 
der  when  the  deed  was  committed  in  battle  against  her  public 
enemy. 

A  flare  of  excitement,  with  talk  of  war  followed.  Sumner 
promptly  took  the  side  of  Great  Britain  and  declared  that  his 
country  was  wrong.  He  so  wrote  his  friends,  giving  his  reasons. 
Mr.  Webster,  who  was  then  Secretary  of  State,  insisted  that  Mc 
Leod  could  only  be  discharged  by  the  courts  and  directed  the 
Attorney-General  of  th&-  United  States  to  appear  before  the 
courts  of  New  York  and  make  this  defence  for  McLeod  and 
demand  his  release.  But  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of 
New  York  when  McLeod  was  brought  before  it  upon  a  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  declined  to  release  him.  The  feverish  state  of 
the  public  mind  towards  England,  growing  out  of  disputes  about 
slavery  and  the  North-Eastern  boundary,  the  suspense  attending 
the  protracted  proceedings  in  McLeod's  case,  the  determined 
position  of  New  York  and  the  threatening  attitude  of  England, 
gave  for  a  time,  an  alarming  aspect  to  the  situation.  It  after 
wards  became  ludicrous,  when,  upon  McLeod's  trial,  an  alibi 
was  proven  for  him  and  he  was  acquitted. 

The  case  of  the  "  Creole  "  followed  close  upon  the  exciting 
stage  of  McLeod's  trouble.  The  "  Creole  "  was  a  vessel  that 
sailed,  in  1841,  from  Virginia  to  New  Orleans,  with  a  cargo  of 
slaves.  On  the  way,  the  slaves  rose  in  insurrection,  killed  their 
master,  threw  the  crew  of  the  vessel  into  irons  and  put  into  the 
English  port  of  Nassau,  in  the  West  India  Islands.  There  the 
slaves  were  freed  and  the  vessel  was  allowed  to  continue  its 
course  deprived  of  its  cargo.  The  occurrence  recalled  other  oc 
casions  when  slaves  belonging  to  people  of  the  South  had  been 
liberated  under  similar  circumstances.  The  Southern  mind 
was  at  once  aroused  in  defence  of  their  "  peculiar  institution  ". 

During  the  discussion  of  the  case  in  Congress,  Joshua  R. 
Giddings  of  Ohio,  introduced  a  series  of  resolutions,  since 
known  from  the  name  of  their  author  as  the  "  Giddings 
Resolutions  ",  which  sought  to  define  the  limits  of  slavery  in 
the  United  States.  They  declared  that  slavery  could  have 
no  existence  outside  of  the  States  that  permitted  it,  that  an 
owner  by  taking  his  slaves  into  other  free  States  or  Territories 
or  upon  the  high  seas,  by  that  act  gave  them  their  freedom  and 
that  therefore  the  slaves  upon  the  "  Creole  "  were  only  freeing 
themselves  from  an  unlawful  detention.  The  reading  of  the  res 
olutions  aroused  a  storm  of  indignation  in  the  House,  then 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  125 

strongly  pro-slavery  in  its  sympathies.  A  resolution  was  at 
once  introduced  and  passed,  condemning  the  conduct  of  Gid- 
dings  as  unwarranted  and  unwarrantable  and  as  deserving  the 
severest  condemnation  of  the  people  of  the  country  and  of  Con 
gress  in  particular.  Giddings  at  once  resigned  his  seat,  but  was 
immediately  re-elected  by  an  overwhelming  majority,  with  in 
structions  from  his  district  to  present  his  resolutions  again  and 
press  them  to  a  vote. 

The  House  did  not  allow  the  resolutions  to  be  introduced 
again,  but  Mr.  Webster,  as  Secretary  of  State,  presented  the 
"  Creole "  matter  to  Lord  Ashburton,  who  was  then  in  the 
United  States  as  Special  Plenipotentiary  from  Great  Britain,  to 
negotiate  a  treaty  defining  the  north-eastern  boundary  of  the 
United  States.  Mr.  Webster  insisted  upon  the  return  of  the 
slaves  that  had  escaped  from  the  "  Creole  "  and  a  treaty  regula 
tion  which  would  prevent  a  recurrence  of  such  troubles.  The 
difficulty  was  finally  adjusted  by  a  reference  of  the  matter  under 
the  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington  for  the  return  of 
fugitives  from  justice.' 

Webster's  dispatches  upon  this  question  surprised  and  startled 
many  people  in  New  England  and  among  this  number  was 
Sumner.  Dr.  Channing  was  still  living  and  he  thought  the 
doctrines  of  these  dispatches  committed  the  whole  Union  to  the 
defence  of  slavery,  at  home  and  abroad,  and  were  so  pernicious 
that  they  should  at  once  be  combated.  He  wrote  a  pamphlet 
upon  the  subject,  "  The  Duty  of  the  Free  States."  Before  its 
publication,  he  submitted  it  to  Sumner  and  Hillard  and  his  son, 
William  F.  Channing,  for  their 'criticism.  Sumner  took  a  deep 
interest  in  it  and  made  numerous  suggestions,  furnished  him 
materials,  and  he  and  Hillard  read  the  proofs  as  it  was  passing 
through  the  press.  Sumner  maintained  that  the  slaves  on  the 
"  Creole  "  had  a  right  to  their  freedom  and  that  the  English 
government  was  bound,  by  its  own  laws,  to  recognize  this.  He 
approved  the  doctrines  of  the  "  Giddings  Resolutions "  and 
maintained  that  Giddings  was  entitled  to  his  opinions  whether 
right  or  wrong,  and,  as  a  Representative,  to  express  them  in 
Congress  and  that  he  should  not  have  been  censured. 

To  Lord  Morpeth,  he  wrote :  "  You  will  see  how  rapidly  this 
question  of  slavery  moves  in  the  country.  The  South  seems  to 
have  the  madness  which  precedes  great  reverses.  I  agree  with 
Mr.  Giddings  in  his  resolutions.  Indeed  they  are  the  exact 
reverse  of  Mr.  Calhoun's  famous  resolutions,  adopted  by  the 
senate  three  years  ago ;  and  from  Mr.  Calhoun's  I  most 
thoroughly  dissent.  Thank  God !  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  does  not  recognize  man  as  property.  It  speaks  of 


126  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

slaves  as  persons.  Slavery  is  a  local  institution,  drawing  its 
vitality  from  State  laws ;  therefore  when  the  slave-owner  volun 
tarily  takes  his  slave  beyond  the  sphere  of  the  State  laws, 
he  manumits  him.  This  was  the  case  with  the  owner  of  the 
"  Creole " ;  and  Mr.  Giddings,  in  asserting  tne  freedom  of 
those  slaves  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  laid 
down  a  constitutional  truth.  But  suppose  it  were  not  true  in 
point  of  constitutional  law,  still  Mr.  Giddings  had  a  perfect 
right  to  assert  it;  and  the  slaveholders  in  voting  to  censure 
him,  have  sowed  the  wind.  I  fear  the  reaping  of  the  whirl 
wind." 

Mr.  Jacob  Harvey,  -a  gentleman  of  Irish  birth,  living  in  New 
York  city,  had  made  the  acquaintance  of  Sumner,  while  on  a 
visit  to  his  brother  Albert,  who  was  then  residing  there.  Know 
ing  Sumner's  familiarity  with  the  law  of  nations  he  wrote  him 
for  his  opinion  of  the  "  Creole  "  affair.  Sumner  answered  him 
at  some  length.  In  this  letter  Sumner  took  the  position  that 
England  could  not  deliver  up  the  slaves  who  were  not  impli 
cated  in  the  mutiny  and  murder  by  which  the  government  of  the 
ship  was  overthrown  because  she  had  laid  down  a  rule  not  to 
recognize  property  in  human  beings  after  the  date  of  her  Eman 
cipation  Act.  He  argued  that  she  could  not  lend  her  machinery 
of  justice  to  execute  laws  she  had  already  pronounced  un 
christian  and  immoral  any  more  than  she  would  to  enforce  a 
contract  of  prostitution  or  concubinage.  He  admitted  the  case 
of  the  slaves  who  had  participated  in  the  mutiny  and  murder 
was  not  so  clear,  but  that,  nevertheless,  the  New  England  courts 
had  decided  that  a  slave,  who  came  to  their  soil,  by  the  consent 
of  his  master,  thereby  became  entitled  to  his  freedom  and  so 
when  taken  upon  the  high  sea,  beyond  the  boundaries  of  the 
States  where  slavery  was  legalized,  he  was  remitted  to  his  nat 
ural  right  to  freedom  and  was  justified  in  using  whatever  force 
was  necessary  to  overcome  the  power  which  deprived  him  of  it. 
But  if  they  were  guilty  as  claimed,  he  argued,  then  their  crime 
was  piracy  and  so  it  became  the  duty  of  England  to  retain  and 
try  them  under  her  own  law  forbidding  piracy  and  not  send 
them  to  the  United  States,  to  be  tried  under  our  law. 

From  these  letters  it  will  be  seen  how  decidedly  Sumner  had 
taken  his  stand  in  opposition  to  slavery.  He  was  long  before 
this  a  subscriber  and  reader  of  The  Liberator,  the  anti-slavery 
paper  published  by  William  Lloyd  Garrison  in  Boston.  It  was 
the  first  paper  he  ever  subscribed  for ;  but  he  did  not  agree  with 
many  of  its  teachings.  It  was  too  radical  in  its  theories  and 
too  violent  in  its  utterances  to  meet  his  unqualified  approval. 
He  believed  that  slavery  was  wrong,  a  great  national  disgrace 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

and  that  it  should  be  abolished.  He  was  deeply  in  earnest  upon 
this  subject.  His  heart  was  full  of  it.  Upon  hardly  any  other 
subject  do  his  letters  so  abound  in  references  as  this. 

But  Garrison  thought  that  a  republic  that  permitted  slavery 
constituted  a  league  with  hell;  that  it  leagued  every  person 
who  countenanced  it  or  took  any  part  in  its  affairs  with  the 
slaveholder  and  made  all  accountable  for  his  wrongs.  Hence 
Garrison  taught  that  all  who  opposed  slavery  must  refuse  to  vote 
or  hold  office  or  have  anything  whatever  to  do  actively  with  the 
conduct  of  the  government,  that  the  most  they  could  do  was  to 
passively  submit  to  its  laws.  He  inculcated  this  doctrine  with 
burning  earnestness  and  sometimes  in  violent  language. 

Sumner,  on  the  contrary,  believed  that  it  was  the  duty  of 
all  good  citizens,  by  their  votes  as  well  as  their  voices,  to  unite 
in  correcting  the  wrong  and  in  placing  men  in  office  who  were 
thoroughly  in  sympathy  with  their  cause  and  that  it  was  the 
duty  of  anti-slavery  men  to  accept  office,  to  promote  their  com 
mon  purpose.  Though  entertaining  these  widely  different 
views,  Sumner  did  not  quarrel  with  Garrison  and  his  followers, 
nor  they  with  him.  Each  retained  the  respect  and  confidence  of 
the  other.  It  was  only  a  difference  of  methods ;  their  cause  was 
the  same.  But,  in  the  light  of  subsequent  events,  it  will  hardly 
be  disputed  now  that  Sumner's  method  was  more  practical 
than  Garrison's. 

Sumner  already  viewed  with  apprehension  the  growing 
sentiment  in  the  South  for  more  territory,  out  of  which  to  carve 
slave  states.  In  1843,  he  wrote  Dr.  Howe,  then  travelling  in 
Europe:  "We  fear  some  insidious  movements  in  favor  of 
Texas.  The  South  yearns  for  that  immense  cantle  of  territory 
to  carve  into  great  slaveholding  States.  We  shall  witness  in 
this  Congress  an  animated  contest  on  this  matter.  *  *  *  I 
wish  that  our  people  and  Government  would  concern  them 
selves  with  what  we  have  now.  Let  us  fill  that  with  knowledge 
and  virtue  and  love  of  one's  neighbor;  and  let  England  and 
Russia  take  the  rest, — I  do  not  care  who.  There  has  been  a 
recent  debate  in  Congress,  in  which  Mr.  Charles  Ingersoll  said 
he  would  go  to  war  rather  than  allow  England  to  occupy 
Cuba.  I  say :  '  Take  Cuba,  Victoria,  if  you  will ;  banish  thence 
slavery;  lay  the  foundation  of  Saxon  freedom;  build  presses 
and  school-houses ! '  What  harm  can  then  ensue  to  us  ?  Mr. 
Ingersoll  proceeds  on  the  plan  of  preparing  for  war.  He 
adopts  the  moral  of  the  old  fable  of  JEsop, — which,  you  know, 
I  have  always  thought  so  pernicious, — where  the  wild  boar  was 
whetting  his  tusks,  though  no  danger  was  near,  that  he  might 
be  prepared  for  danger.  I  wish  our  country  would  cease  to 


128  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

whet  its  tusks.  The  appropriations  of  the  navy  last  year  were 
nine  million  dollars.  Imagine  half — nay,  a  tithe — of  this  sum 
given  annually  to  objects  of  humanity,  education  and  litera 
ture  !  I  know  of  nothing  in  our  Government  that  troubles  me 
more  than  this  thought.  And  who  can  talk  so  lightly  of  war? 
One  year  of  war  would  break  open  and  let  loose  all  the  im 
prisoned  winds,  now  happily  imprisoned  by  that  great  Aeolus — 
Peace — <and  let  them  range  over  the  world." 

Thus  he  placed  universal  emancipation  and  universal  peace 
before  him  as  the  great  objects  to  be  sought  for  in  our  ever- 
widening  civilization.  Both  causes,  it  will  hereafter  be  seen, 
were  to  be  strangely  influential  in  moulding  his  own  fortunes. 
But  such  a  thought  had  probably  never  thus  far  occurred  to 
him.  His  interest  in  them  seemed  to  come  only  from  his 
thoughtful  reading  and  observation  and  his  convictions  upon 
these  subjects, — so  deep  that  he  could  not  repress  an  expression 
of  them,  when  he  saw  how  generally  they  were  ignored.  Thus 
far  his  earnestness  and  the  intensity  of  his  convictions  were 
known  only  to  his  intimate  friends.  To  them  he  spoke  and 
wrote  freely  his  opinions  and  to  them  they  were  well  known. 
But  to  the  public  who  knew  him,  if  it  knew  him  at  all,  only  as 
a  struggling  young  attorney,  of  scholarly  tastes  and  attain 
ments,  giving  of  his  time  largely  to  writing  for  a  law  magazine 
and  hearing  recitations  in  the  Law  School,  what  mattered  it 
what  his  opinions  were  upon  subjects  occupying  so  little  of  the 
commercial  mind  as  war  and  slavery  ?  It  was  reserved  for  the 
future  to  develop  the  importance  of  these  subjects,  both  to  him 
and  them. 

It  is  apparent  how  much  Sumner  was  occupied  at  this  time 
with  subjects  outside  of  his  profession  and  yet  involving  ques 
tions  of  international  law.  Another  subject  of  this  kind,  that 
he  took  much  interest  in,  attracted  public  attention  at  the  time, 
though  it  is  now  almost  forgotten.  It  was  known  as  the 
Somers  Mutiny.  The  U.  S.  brig  of  war  Somers  had  sailed 
for  the  coast  of  Africa,  under  the  command  of  Alexander 
Slidell  Mackenzie.  The  "  Mackenzie  "  was  added  to  his  name 
by  an  act  of  the  Legislature  of  New  York.  He  was  a  brother  of 
John  Slidell  who  with  Mason,  was  a  Confederate  Commissioner 
to  England  and  other  European  countries  during  the  American 
Civil  War.  The  crew  of  the  Somers  was  partly  composed  of 
cadets  from  the  U.  S.  Naval  Academy  at  Annapolis,  Md., 
among  whom  was  Philip  Spencer,  a  son  of  John  C.  Spencer, 
then  Secretary  of  War  in  President  Tyler's  Cabinet.  During 
the  voyage,  a  mutiny  arose  among  the  crew,  headed  by  young 
Spencer  and  two  others,  Small  and  Cromwell.  Their  purpose 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  129 

was  to  kill  the  officers,  take  possession  of  the  ship  and  turn 
pirates.  The  mutiny  was  discovered  and  the  leaders  of  it' were 
arrested  and  thrown  into  irons,  but  it  threatening  to  break  out 
again,  Mackenzie  called  a  council  of  his  officers  and  they  recom 
mended  that  the  safety  of  the  vessel  required  that  the  leaders 
be  hung.  Spencer,  Small  and  Cromwell  were  accordingly  hung 
at  the  yard-arm. 

Upon  the  return  of  the  vessel  to  the  United  States,  the 
matter  was  the  subject  of  an  investigation  by  a  court  martial. 
The  position  and  influence  of  Spencer's  father  made  the  situa 
tion  a  dangerous  one  for  Mackenzie.  Sumner  was  appealed  to 
by  the  friends  of  Mackenzie  to  write  and  publish  a  defence  of 
the  action  of  the  officers,  to  aid  in  keeping  public  sentiment 
right  in  Boston.  This  he  did  in  a  strong  article  in  the  North 
American  Review,  taking  the  position  that  the  executions  were 
justifiable  on  the  ground  of  self-defence,  that  it  was  not  a 
question  alone,  what  the  actual  danger  was,  but  whether  the 
officers,  in  the  reasonable  and  proper  use  of  their  faculties,  had 
just  ground,  from  the  circumstances,  for  believing,  that  their 
own  lives  and  the  safety  of  the  ship  required  this  action.  His 
position  was  approved  by  Judge  Story  and  by  Judge  Prescott, 
the  father  of  the  historian. 

Mackenzie  was  acquitted  by  the  court  martial.  He  never 
ceased  to  remember  with  gratitude  the  kindness  of  Sumner. 
He  was  a  man  of  culture  and  the  author  of  some  books  of  merit. 
He  promptly  wrote  Sumner  a  letter  acknowledging  his  obliga 
tion  and  later  visited  Boston  and  again  thanked  him.  They 
were  entertained  together  by  Longfellow.  Sumner  was  later 
entertained  by  him  and  his  wife  at  their  home,  in  Tarrytown, 
on  the  Hudson  River.  When  he  died,  a  few  years  later,  there 
was  among  his  papers  a  sealed  note,  to  be  opened  by  his  wife, 
after  he  died,  in  which  he  requested  some  one  to  communicate 
to  Sumner,  in  his  name,  his  thanks  for  his  friendship  and  to 
add  an  expression  of  his  high  appreciation  of  it.  At  the  in 
stance  of  Mrs.  Mackenzie,  this  message  was  communicated  to 
Sumner  by  Commodore  Perry. 

This  incident  in  Sumner's  life  has  a  sequel  to  it.  In  1851, 
Sumner  was  at  Saratoga.  He  had  recently  been  elected  to  the 
U.  S.  Senate.  He  and  John  Slidell,  then  a  Senator  from 
Louisiana,  were  invited  by  a  mutual  friend  to  dine  together; 
but  Slidell  at  once  excused  himself  and  declined  the  invitation. 
In  defending  his  breach  of  courtesy  afterwards,  he  admitted  the 
obligation  he  was  under  to  Sumner  for  the  chivalrous  defence 
of  his  dead  brother,  but  justified  himself,  on  the  ground 
that  Sumner,  in  a  public  speech,  had  invoked  upon  Massachu- 


130  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

setts  a  spirit  of  such  inhospitality  to  slaveholders,  as  would 
prevent  any  of  them  from  ever  setting  foot  within  the  state. 
Slidell  declared  he  would  never  break  bread  with  a  man  who 
entertained  such  sentiments. 

With  Sumner's  growing  interest  in  slavery  and  war  it  was 
natural  that  he  should  take  an  added  interest  in  the  Presiden 
tial  election  of  1844.  The  Democrats  had  nominated  Polk  and 
the  Whigs,  Clay.  The  former  were  threatening  war  with  Mex 
ico  and  the  annexation  of  Texas ;  the  latter  were  opposing  both. 
Sumner  watched  the  struggle  with  interest  but  took  no  public 
part  in  it.  He  voted  for  Clay  and  hoped  he  would  be  elected 
and  was  much  disappointed  at  his  defeat.  But  it  was  the  in 
terest  of  a  scholar  or  philanthropist  that  Sumner  felt;  not  that 
of  a  partisan.  Party  ties  were  never  very  strong  with  him  and, 
thus  far,  he  could  hardly  be  said  to  have  any. 

In  December,  1844,  lie  was  the  Whig  candidate  in  his  ward 
for  member  of  the  School  Committee.  The  ward  was  entitled 
to  two  members  and  his  party  was  in  the  majority ;  though  his 
colleague  was  elected,  he  was  defeated.  He  had  become  much 
interested  in  the  cause  of  education  and  this  induced  him  to 
allow  the  use  of  his  name.  He  does  not,  however,  seem  to  have 
felt  much  interest  in  the  contest.  He  and  his  friend  Howe  were 
in  active  co-operation  with  their  friend  Horace  Mann  in  his 
efforts  to  promote  the  cause  of  popular  education  in  Boston,  and 
if  elected  Sumner  would  probably  have  lent  his  influence  to 
theirs  to  conform  the  city  schools  more  to  European  models. 

One  service  he  undertook  for  the  cause  of  education,  at  this 
time,  that  afterwards  seriously  embarrassed  him.  He  was 
chairman  of  a  committee  appointed  to  secure  an  appropriation 
from  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts  to  rebuild  the  state 
normal  schools  at  Westfield  and  Bridgewater.  He  discharged 
this  duty  with  his  accustomed  ardor  and  fidelity,  distasteful 
as  the  task  was  to  him  of  approaching  the  members  of  the  legis 
lature  for  this  purpose.  He  met  from  them  a  cool  reception 
and  only  after  considerable  effort  and  many  discouragements 
was  his  committee  able  to  secure  a  grudging  appropriation  of 
five  thousand  dollars  and  this  coupled  with  the  condition  that 
the  memorialists  raise  an  equal  amount.  The  towns  contrib 
uted  one  thousand  dollars  each ;  and  the  other  three  thousand 
dollars  the  committee  undertook  to  raise  by  private  sub 
scriptions. 

To  hasten  the  buildings,  Sumner  injudiciously  agreed  to 
raise  five  thousand  dollars  upon  his  own  personal  note,  taking 
the  contributions  of  the  towns  when  collected  in  part  payment. 
Thus  money,  that  might  have  been  easily  raised  with  the  ex- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  131 

citement  of  securing  new  buildings,  was  left  to  be  raised  after 
the  buildings  were  completed  and  the  enthusiasm  gone. 
Sumner  found  himself  a  year  afterwards,  when  the  note  came 
due,  without  funds  to  meet  it  and  three  years  later  it  was  still 
unpaid.  He  had  cause  of  complaint  against  some  members  of 
the  committee  who  did  not  properly  support  him.  The  private 
subscriptions,  to  anticipate  which  the  note  was  partly  given, 
were  slow  in  being  paid  and  some  were  not  paid  at  all.  It 
would  have  been  better  to  allow  the  schools  to  continue  in  the 
buildings  they  had,  though  unsuitable,  until  the  money  was 
actually  in  hand.  But  with  the  aid  of  Mr.  Waterston,  another 
member  of  the  committee,  who  was  always  with  Sumner  faith 
ful  to  the  enterprise,  the  whole  difficulty  was  at  last  adjusted. 

He  performed  another  service  for  the  public  in  1845.  The 
Boston  Athenasum  was  to  be  removed  to  its  site  on  Beacon 
Street  and  he  was  appointed  upon  a  committee  to  determine  the 
plan  of  the  new  building.  He  was  much  interested  in  the 
work  of  the  committee.  He  wrote  to  Crawford  and  his  brother 
George,  telling  them  his  objections  to  numerous  plans  sub 
mitted,  giving  them  his  ideas  of  what  the  building  should  be 
and  asking  them  for  suggestions.  He  wished  especially  to 
secure  a  large,  hospitable,  vestibule  hall  and  stairway  and 
having  admired  the  stairs  leading  to  the  Vatican  on  the  right 
of  St.  Peter's  at  Rome  as  "  of  such  exquisite  proportions  that 
you  seemed  to  be  borne  aloft  on  wings,"  he  had  George  send 
him  their  width,  height  and  breadth.  His  interest  in  archi 
tecture  while  in  Europe  and  his  acquaintances  there  were  other 
wise  useful  to  him  in  his  work  upon  the  committee. 

In  1844  Sumner  was  elected  a  corresponding  member  of  the 
New  York  Historical  Society  and  to  a  membership  in  the 
American  Antiquarian  Society  of  Worcester,  Mass.  The 
former  honor  he  owed  to  his  friend  John  Jay  of  New  York. 
Hillard,  about  the  same  time,  was  made  a  member  of  the  Mas 
sachusetts  Historical  Society.  The  result  of  George  Sumner's 
investigations,  in  Europe,  into  the  history  of  the  Puritans  while 
in  Leyden,  which  he  had  embodied  in  a  monograph  of  thirty- 
two  pages,  appeared  in  the  collections  of  the  last  named  society 
published,  in  1845.  It  is  a  valuable  contribution  to  the  early 
history  of  the  Puritan  fathers, — Charles  pronounced  it  the 
most  interesting  they  had  ever  published.  It  is  repeatedly 
referred  to,  with  commendation,  by  Palfrey  in  his  History  of 
New  England.  George  was  a  discriminating,  scholarly  man, 
fairly  described  by  Charles  as,  "sagacious,  learned,  humane, 
interested  in  all  the  institutions,  which  are  the  fruit  and  token 
of  civilization  in  the  true  sense  of  that  word." 


132  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Judge  Story  had  suffered  a  protracted  illness,  in  the  early 
part  of  the  year  1843.  During  his  sickness,  Sumner  took  his 
place  in  the  Law  School  and  performed  half  the  work  there, 
in  lecturing  and  hearing  recitations.  He  tried  to  keep  up  the 
work  of  his  law  office,  at  the  same  time,  but  in  doing  so  found 
himself  a  very  busy  man,  the  lectures  requiring,  for  their  prep 
aration,  a  great  deal  of  attention.  He  continued  his  residence 
in  Boston,  and  the  daily  trips  to  Cambridge  made  an  addi 
tional  draft.  He  was  thus  occupied  for  eight  months.  During 
this  period  he  withdrew  entirely  from  society,  declining  all 
invitations,  except  the  hospitalities  of  one  or  two  intimate 
friends. 

But  on  the  tenth  of  April,  1844,  he  commenced  another  task 
that  taxed  him  still  more  severely.  He  undertook  for  two 
thousand  dollars  to  edit  and  annotate  the  Chancery  Eeports  of 
Francis  Vesey,  Jr.,  in  twenty  volumes  furnishing  the  manu 
script  at  the  rate  of  a  volume  each  fortnight, — as  fast  as  fifty- 
seven  printers  could  print  it.  In  the  notes,  he  was  to  bring  the 
learning  upon  the  questions  decided  down  to  date  with  a  full 
reference  to  all  the  English  and  American  authorities.  It  was 
a  herculean  task  and  well-nigh  proved  fatal  to  him.  As  it 
progressed  he  realized  the  hopeless  drudgery  of  his  undertaking 
and  plead  for  more  time,  but  the  publishers  were  inexorable  and 
he  struggled  on  with  his  load,  working  till  two  o'clock  in  the 
morning,  until  the  completion  of  the  fourth  volume,  when  he 
broke  down  and  suffering  from  a  slow,  nervous  fever,  brought 
on  by  too  great  work  and  confinement  and  too  little  exercise, 
he  was  obliged  to  stop.  This  was  about  the  first  of  June ;  and 
he  was  not  able  to  resume  work  until  the  middle  of  November. 

During  June  and  the  first  half  of  July,  he  was  confined  to 
the  house,  unable  to  do  anything  more  than  write  one  or  two 
letters  to  his  brother  George.  About  this  time,  his  disease  took 
a  more  serious  turn  and  for  the  next  two  weeks  he  was  com 
pletely  prostrated,  with  a  raging  fever  and  delirium,  and  for 
several  weeks  the  physicians  despaired  of  his  recovery.  But 
by  July  thirty-first,  he  had  so  far  improved  as  to  be  able  to  dic 
tate  another  letter  to  George.  The  vigor  of  his  constitution 
gradually  asserted  itself  and  he  was  soon  able  to  drive  out.  On 
the  sixteenth  of  August,  he  dictated  a  letter  to  Howe  that 
describes  the  progress  of  his  disease : 

"  You  will  find  me  a  wreck.  When  I  wrote  you,  July  first,  I 
seemed  nearly  well ;  but  in  a  few  days  the  ship  was  struck  again, 
and  the  bolt,  it  was  said,  had  pierced  the  hull.  I  became  very 
weak  after  passing  through  the  various  stages  of  a  fever. 
During  the  season  of  my  strength  I  raged  about  my  room  for 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  133 

half  the  nights,  invoking  sleep  (which  once  descended  upon 
me  so  gently),  in  every  way.  One  of  those  nights  I  was  filled 
with  the  idea  that  I  had  a  long  interview  with  you,  and  I  in 
quired  in  the  morning  if  you  had  not  been  at  the  house  the 
night  before.  As  my  strength  wasted  I  kept  to  my  bed.  It 
was  only  afterwards  that  I  knew  that,  at  this  time,  all  my 
friends  (except  Longfellow)  abandoned  all  hope  of  my  re 
covery.  Even  Hillard,  who  held  out  long,  confessed  that  when 
he  saw  me  bereft  of  strength  and  almost  speechless,  he  went 
away  thinking  with  all  others  that  my  end  was  at  hand.  Mean 
while  I  knew  nothing  of  this  anxiety.  Felton  laughed  jollity 
each  day  at  my  bedside,  and  Hillard  and  Longfellow,  the  only 
other  persons  I  saw,  said  nothing  to  excite  my  observation. 
But  the  strength  of  my  constitution  conquered;  though  the  very 
day  on  which  I  felt  within  me  the  instinct  of  recovery,  Dr. 
Jackson  solemnly  told  me  that  my  case  was  incurable  and  that 
if  I  should  live  1  never  should  be  able  to  do  anything.  To  this 
I  replied  that  I  did  not  shrink  from  the  idea  of  death;  but  to 
pass  through  life  doing  nothing,  performing  no  duty,  perhaps 
'  a  driveller  and  a  show ' — this  was  more  than  I  could  bear. 
He  replied,  'Perhaps  the  vigor  of  your  constitution  will  con 
quer  all.'  Since  then  I  have  been  gaining  strength  slowly,  but 
each  day.  I  am  driven  out  nine  or  ten  miles  daily.  As  I  meet 
friends,  I  observe  the  astonishment  with  which  they  regard  me, 
apparently  as  one  risen  from  the  dead.  Ben  Pierce  said  to  me 
in  his  artless  manner,  '  Well !  I  never  expected  to  see  you 
again.'  '' 

"  For  such  a  signal  recovery  another  person  would  feel  un 
bounded  gratitude.  I  am  going  to  say  what  will  offend  you,  but 
what  I  trust  God  will  pardon.  Since  my  convalescence  I  have 
thought  much  and  often  whether  I  have  any  just  feeling  of 
gratitude  that  my  disease  was  arrested.  Let  me  confess  to  you 
that  I  cannot  find  it  in  my  bosom.  .  .  .  Why  was  I  spared? 
For  me  there  is  no  future  either  of  usefulness  or  happiness/' 

He  was  very  much  worried  for  fear  he  would  come  out  of  his 
sickness  a  confirmed  invalid.  To  Longfellow  he  wrote,  on 
August  twenty-eighth :  "  Dr.  Jackson  insists  that  my  condition 
is  (  very  serious ',  and  commends  me  to  great  care  of  myself. 
Perhaps  he  is  right,  and  my  future  life  is  to  be  that  of  a  halting 
invalid.  At  the  thought  of  this — not  at  the  idea  of  death,  for 
of  this  I  am  careless — shadows  and  thick  darkness  descend 
upon  me."  And  this  thought  seems  to  have  pursued  him  for 
weeks.  He  recurs  to  it  repeatedly  in  his  letters,  as  the  one  fate 
most  to  be  dreaded.  He  did  not  fear  death.  He  was  despond 
ent.  And,  indeed,  this  was  not  an  uncommon  state  of  his  mind, 


134  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

during  these  years,  both  before  and  after  this  sickness.  He  was 
dissatisfied  with  what  he  had  been  able  to  accomplish  and  with 
his  prospects  in  life.  He  felt  that  it  was  so  far  short  of  what  he 
had  aimed  at,  that  his  career  was  a  failure.  He  could  welcome 
death  as  a  release  from  toil  and  the  responsibility  which  he 
felt  life  imposed, — especially  when  it  brought  no  recompense 
in  honor  or  recognized  usefulness.  And  to  live  and  drag  out 
the  miserable  existence  of  a  constant  sufferer,  of  no  use  to  his 
friends  or  humanity,  but  a  care  and  charge  to  others, — the 
thought  of  this  was  worse  than  the  prospect  of  death ! 

But  he  was  willing  to  confess  that  his  sickness  had  some  com 
pensations.  His  friends  were  very  attentive  to  him.  While  his 
disease  was  at  its  worst,  only  Hillard,  Longfellow  and  Felton 
were  admitted  to  his  room,  but  many  others  called  to  inquire 
after  his  health  and  sent  presents  of  woodcocks,  plovers  and 
other  delicacies  to  tempt  his  appetite.  As  he  grew  better  others 
were  admitted  to  his  room  and  helped  to  lighten  his  hours. 
Bancroft  had  been  nominated,  by  the  Democrats,  against  his 
wish,  for  Governor,  and  he  came  with  a  humorous  proposition 
to  appoint  Sumner  "  one  of  his  aides-de-camp  ".  But  when  the 
election  was  over  he  found  he  had  no  offices  to  fill.  When 
Sumner  was  able  to  drive  out,  numerous  invitations  came  to 
him  for  visits  during  his  convalescence. 

He  gratefully  mentioned  this  kindness  in  a  letter  to  George : 
"  I  cannot  forbear  alluding,  however,  to  the  great  kindness,  in 
terest  and  sympathy  which  I  have  received  from  quarters  from 
which  I  had  little  occasion  to  expect  them.  Blessed  be  the 
kindly  charities  of  life  !  They  sweeten  existence  and  come  with 
healing  even  to  the  suffering  invalid.  Better  than  before  I 
know  now  the  affection  and  tenderness  which  grace  the  lives  of 
many,  from  whom  I  did  not  expect,  to  such  an  extent,  these 
soft  virtues.  Let  me  extract  from  my  sickness  a  moral :  It 
may  not  be  unprofitable,  if  it  serves  to  elevate  humanity  in  my 
mind,  and  to  inspire  love  and  attachment  for  my  fellow-men." 

On  the  twenty-eighth  of  August,  he  had  so  far  recovered  as  to 
be  able  to  undertake  a  journey  to  Pittsfield,  where  he  went  by 
invitation  to  spend  a  couple  of  weeks  with  Mr.  Nathan  Apple- 
ton's  family,  who  were  summering  there.  They  thought  the 
bracing  air  of  the  woody  hills  of  Berkshire  would  hasten  his 
recovery.  Hillard  accompanied  him  and  remained  a  week ; 
and  Howe,  just  arrived  from  Europe,  hastened  there  to  see 
him.  He  spend  his  days,  at  Pittsfield,  as  much  as  possible  in 
the  open  air,  riding  horseback  and  in  the  carriage  and  making 
repeated  excursions  to  Lenox  and  Stockbridge  and  other  neigh 
boring  villages.  At  Lenox  he  was  the  guest  of  Mr.  Samuel 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  135 

Ward  and  there  he  met  the  Austins,  the  Sedgwicks  and  Mrs. 
Butler  (Fanny  Kemble).  This  gifted  woman  was  then  making 
her  home  there  and,  in  the  parlor  of  the  Sedgwicks,  he  heard 
her  read  "  Macbeth/7  and  sing,  and  enjoyed  the  charm  of  her 
conversation. 

This  picture,  he  gives  us,  of  his  life  at  Pittsfield  and  Lenox. 
On  Saturday  he  went  with  Edward  Austin  in  an  open  buggy 
to  view  the  farms.  Afterwards  they  looked  on  while  the  girls 
and  others  enjoyed  the  sport  of  archery.  "  The  next  day  was 
Sunday,  and  I  was  perplexed  whether  or  not  to  use  Mr.  New 
ton's  horse,  as  I  presumed  the  master  never  used  him  on  Sun 
day.  But  my  scruples  gave  way  before  my  longing  for  the  best 
of  exercise.  I  left  Pittsfield  as  the  bell  was  tolling  for  church 
and  arrived  at  Lenox  sometime  before  the  second  bell.  I  sat 
in  Miss  Sedgwick's  room ;  time  passed  on.  Mrs.  Butler  pro 
posed  to  accompany  me  back  to  Pittsfield  on  horseback.  I 
stayed  to  the  cold  dinner,  making  it  a  lunch;  time  again 
passed  on,  from  the  delay  in  saddling  the  horses.  We  rode  the 
longest  way,  and  I  enjoyed  my  companion  very  much.  I  did 
not  reach  home  till  four  and  a  half  o'clock.  Meanwhile  the 
whole  house  had  been  filled  with  anxiety  on  my  account." 

But  with  all  this  pleasure,  he  did  not  forget  to  repeatedly 
intercede  with  the  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth,  whom  he 
met  there,  to  appoint  his  friend  Luther  S.  Gushing,  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  Court.  And  Gushing  shortly  afterwards 
received  the  appointment. 

From  Lenox,  Simmer  went  to  Newport,  where  his  brother 
Albert  had  a  cottage,  hoping  that  the  ocean  breezes  would  sup 
plement  the  benefits  he  had  received  from  the  Berkshire  Hills. 
Here  he  resorted  again  to  his  favorite  exercise  of  horseback 
riding,  spending  the  days,  as  much  as  possible,  in  the  open  air 
and  the  nights  in  sleep.  He  soon  felt  the  effects  of  both  in  an 
abundant  return  of  health.  On  September  thirtieth,  he  wrote 
Howe :  "  I  am  so  well  that  I  begin  to  tire  of  my  intellectual 
inactivity  and  yearn  to  plunge  again  into  my  affairs.  I  shall 
be  with  you  at  the  beginning  of  next  week  well  mended." 

But  sad  tidings  from  Julia  cut  his  visit  at  Newport  short. 
The  word  was  that  Mary  was  failing  rapidly  and  they  feared 
the  end  was  near. 

He  hurried  home  to  see  their  worst  fears  realized.  She  passed 
away  on  Friday  morning,  October  eleventh,  1844,  and  was 
buried  the  following  Sunday  afternoon. 

Two  days  later,  in  communicating  the  intelligence  to  George, 
Charles  wrote :  "  I  was  recalled  from  Newport,  where  I  was 
passing  my  time  in  exercise  in  the  open  air,  by  the  tidings  of 


13G  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  progress  of  Mary's  disease.  I  found  her  weak,  very  weak, 
— almost  voiceless.  Her  beautiful  countenance  was  sunken; 
and  the  sharp  angles  of  death  had  appeared  even  before  the 
breath  had  departed.  She  lingered  on,  however, — sometimes 
in  considerable  pain — and  we  feared  with  each  protracted  day 
new  suffering.  She  herself  wished  to  die ;  and  I  believe  that  we 
all  became  anxious  at  last  that  the  Angel  should  descend  to 
bear  her  aloft.  From  the  beautiful  flower  of  her  life,  the  leaves 
had  all  gently  fallen  to  the  earth ;  and  there  remained  but  little 
for  the  hand  of  death  to  pluck.  During  the  night  preceding 
the  morning  on  which  she  left  us,  she  slept  like  a  child,  and 
within  a  short  time  of  her  death,  when  asked  if  she  were  in  pain, 
she  said :  i  No :  angels  are  taking  care  of  me !  ' ' 

For  more  than  two  years  she  had  been  in  failing  health.  Her 
disease  finally  developed  into  consumption,  to  which  the  family 
had  an  hereditary  tendency,  and,  during  the  summer  and  fall 
of  1844,  it  made  rapid  progress.  She  and  Charles  were  both 
sick  at  the  same  time,  confined  to  their  rooms  at  home,  and  the 
care  of  them  was  a  severe  experience  to  their  mother  and  Julia. 
The  burden  of  it  fell  on  the  mother.  While  Charles'  disease 
was  at  its  worst,  she  nursed  him  and  then,  as  he  improved,  she 
turned  to  Mary,  who  was  sinking  rapidly.  For  some  weeks 
Mary  was  taken  to  Springfield  and  Waltham,  hoping  that  a 
change  would  prove  beneficial,  but  with  the  gleams  of  hope  and 
seeming  improvement,  peculiar  to  this  disease,  which  charms  its 
victims,  while  it  steals  its  coils  about  them,  she  faded  away  and 
soon  came  home  to  die. 

Her  death  was  a  sad  stroke  to  Charles.  She  was  his  favorite 
and  the  most  beautiful  of  his  sisters.  She  had  a  lovely  disposi 
tion.  Having  reached  young  womanhood,  while  he  was  in 
Europe,  when  he  returned  to  enter  upon  the  most  enjoyable 
years  of  his  young  manhood,  he  found  her  a  delightful  com 
panion.  She  was  tall,  finely  formed  and  graceful,  with  a  clear- 
cut  Grecian  face,  enjoying  society  and  deservedly  popular.  He 
found  much  pleasure  and  pride  in  their  association.  Her  un 
expected  sickness,  coming  just  as  life  was  opening  before  her, 
with  so  much  promise  of  happiness  both  for  herself  and  others, 
the  long,  slow  but  irresistible  decline,  as  irresistible  and  pitiless 
as  fate,  which  he  was  doomed  to  watch  with  so  much  solicitude 
and  yet  feel  himself  powerless  to  avert,  his  descent  into  the  very 
valley  of  the  shadow,  at  her  side,  to  be  afterwards  rescued,  just 
as  the  final  blow  descended  upon  her,  to  be  hurried  home  to  see 
her  laid  away,  where  the  winds  of  winter  were  already  sweeping 
the  grave  of  her  young  life,  to  go  back  to  their  old  home  that 
hardly  seemed  home  without  her  and  then  be  obliged  to  turn 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  137 

to  his  own  solitary  ceaseless  task,  with  this  dark  background  of 
thought, — was  a  sad  experience.  He  always  regarded  it  as 
one  of  the  saddest  of  his  life.  The  familiar  figure,  in  life's 
opening  hardly  conscious  of  its  own  beauty,  the  quiet,  sweet 
disposition,  spreading  its  gentle,  womanly  spirit  over  his  life, 
was  gone.  And  yet,  not  gone; — for  it  lingered,  in  memory, 
forever ! 

With  the  beginning  of  November,  he  was  back  at  his  work 
again.  His  "  friction-match "  case,  which  has  already  been 
noticed,  was  his  first  serious  employment.  The  suit  for  damages 
was  tried  to  a  jury  and  resulted  in  a  verdict  for  his  client.  In 
the  argument  of  it,  Sumner  spoke  ten  hours, — arguments  were 
longer  then  than  now.  Closing  this  business,  he  resumed  work 
on  his  edition  of  Vesey.  When  his  sickness  overtook  him,  he 
was  obliged  to  give  it  up  and  the  publishers  employed  others  to 
continue  his  work.  In  this  way  the  fifth  volume  was  edited 
by  J.  C.  Perkins,  of  Salem,  Sumner  hoping  that  with  this 
assistance  he  would  be  able  to  continue  the  others.  And  he  did 
finish  the  sixth.  But  then  he  again  broke  down  and,  during 
his  sickness,  the  seventh  to  the  twelfth  volumes  inclusive  were 
edited  by  Mr.  Perkins  and  Mr.  Charles  B.  Goodrich.  Sumner 
finished  the  others.  It  occupied  him  fully  for  the  next  six 
months  and  before  it  was  finished,  he  was  compelled  to  realize 
again  the  drudgery  of  his  task.  One  feature  he  added  to  it, 
unusual  then  and  still  so  in  law  books ;  he  inserted  sketches  of 
the  lives  of  the  judges  and  others  whose  names  appeared  in  the 
reports. 

He  soon  fell  back  into  his  old  habit  of  working  late  into  the 
night.  Writing  to  his  brother  George,  on  December  thirty-first, 
he  said :  "  It  is  now  almost  midnight, — an  hour  after  the  time 
when  my  physicians  sentenced  me  to  bed.  In  truth,  however,  I 
am  not  very  regardful  of  their  injunctions.  These  late  hours, — 
the  crown  of  the  night — are  the  choicest  of  the  twenty-four  for 
labor,  for  reading  and  thought ;  and  I  feel  guilty  of  a  wasteful 
excess  when  I  sacrifice  them  to  sleep."  He  withdrew  from 
society  and  avoided  assemblages  of  people,  but  he  relaxed  this 
rigorous  life,  during  the  holidays,  to  dine  one  day  with  Mr. 
Webster  and  enjoy  a  turbot,  a  tribute  sent  to  him  from  Eng 
land.  On  the  third  day  of  June,  1845,  he  wrote  Lieber,  that 
his  edition  of  Vesey's  Reports  was  finished.  It  was  dedicated 
to  Judge  Story,  as  a  token  of  gratitude  and  admiration,  which 
the  judge  gracefully  acknowledged. 

This  was  Sumner's  first  venture  in  authorship,  if  we  except 
his  contributions  to  law  magazines  and  periodicals.  With  this 
latter  sort  of  writing  he  had  considerable  experience.  Com- 


138  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

menacing  with  his  labors,  as  one  of  the  editors  of  the  Jurist, 
before  he  went  to  Europe,  he  continued  it  after  his  return,  by 
numerous  contributions  to  the  Law  Eeporter  and  an  occa 
sional  one  to  the  North  American  Review.  The  Law  Eeporter 
was  edited  by  Peleg  W.  Chandler,  one  of  Sumner's  friends,  an 
attorney  whose  office  was  at  Number  Four,  Court  Street. 
Sunnier  wrote  reviews  of  "  Story's  Bills  of  Exchange "  and 
of  the  reports  of  New  Hampshire  and  Maine,  of  "  Wedgewood's 
II.  S.  Statutes  "  and  "  Perkins'  Brown's  Chancery  Reports," 
articles  on  "The  Eightieth  Birthday  of  Chancellor  Kent," 
"The  University  of  Heidelberg,"  "The  Number  Seven," 
"  Punishment  and  Prisons,"  etc.  His  contributions  to  the 
Reporter,  like  those  in  the  Jurist,  show  him  to  have  had  more 
interest,  in  the  literature  of  the  law,  than  in  the  law  itself; 
and,  indeed,  many  of  his  articles  for  these  periodicals  would 
now  hardly  be  classed  as  matter  for  a  legal  publication.  But 
they  all  show  his  wealth  of  learning,  his  wide  reading,  his  mar 
vellous  memory  and  his  easy,  flowing  style. 

Too  much  importance  can  hardly  be  given  the  effect  of  his 
work  on  these  legal  periodicals  on  Sumner's  career.  He  was 
estimated  a  good  writer  among  his  classmates  in  college,  but 
his  performances  there  do  not  rank  as  of  any  permanent  im 
portance.  But  the  daily  practice  of  writing,  given  by  his  posi 
tion  as  one  of  the  editors  of  the  Jurist,  formed  his  style 
upon  the  severe  model  of  clear,  pure,  practical  English,  at  a 
very  early  period  of  his  life.  It  taught  him  thoroughly  what 
was  good  English  and  made  him  quick  to  recognize  and  ap 
preciate  it,  when  it  appeared  in  the  form  of  new  books,  as  in  the 
histories  of  Prescott  and  Bancroft.  And  it  taught  him  the 
ways  and  habits  of  editors  of  newspapers  and  periodicals  and 
gave  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  those  of  Boston,  his  home 
city,  and  of  his  State.  All  through  his  after-life  these  things 
were  of  great  advantage  to  him.  He  could  promptly  write  a 
creditable  review  of  a  book  or  a  friendly  notice  of  a  man  and 
secure  their  publication ;  and  thus  bring  either  to  the  favorable 
notice  of  the  public  and,  what  was  frequently  of  more  impor 
tance,  of  the  editors.  This  ability  of  Sumner,  with  his  prompt 
ness  to  use  it,  in  behalf  of  his  friends,  made  his  friendship, 
even  in  these  early  days,  valuable  with  such  men  as  Prescott 
and  Bancroft,  Longfellow  and  Whittier,  and  Emerson  and 
Story. 

And  theirs  was  powerful  for  him.  It  was  such  men  as  these 
that  opened  the  door  of  his  extraordinary  career  as  a  traveller 
in  England  and  even  on  the  Continent.  The  people  he  met 
there  were  also  quick  to  recognize  and  appreciate  such  ability. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  139 

They  felt  that  what  he  saw  and  heard  would  in  all  probability 
reach,  in  some  form,  a  wider  audience  and  they  were,  therefore, 
more  willing  to  extend  his  opportunities  for  information,  as 
well  as  pleasure. 

It  is  not  to  be  understood  that  these  beautiful  friendships, 
that  have  been  mentioned,  sprung  from  selfish  considerations. 
Far  from  it !  They  were,  by  far  the  greater  part,  owing  to  the 
charming  personality  of  the  men,  who  formed  and  cherished 
them,  and  the  disinterested  affection,  I  may  also  add,  they  en 
tertained  for  one  another.  But  notwithstanding,  in  reviewing 
Sumner's  life,  the  practical  lessons  to  be  drawn  from  it  must 
not  be  overlooked.  They  loved  and  therefore  they  helped  one 
another  and  this  was  one  of  Sumner's  ways  of  helping  them. 
He  then  expected  his  own  career  to  be  made  by  his  pen. 

It  was  not  till  May,  1845,  that  he  made  his  first  public  ad 
dress  before  a  popular  audience.  It  was  on  the  occasion  of  a 
meeting  of  the  Boston  Prison  Discipline  Society,  held  in  Park 
Street  Church.  The  secretary  of  the  society  read  the  annual 
reports  in  which  he  took  strong  grounds  against  the  system  of 
solitary  confinement,  as  pursued  in  the  Pennsylvania  Peni 
tentiary,  at  Philadelphia.  Howe  and  Sumner  were  present. 
Both  had  taken  some  interest  in  the  subject,  which  was  then 
more  discussed  than  now.  When  they  heard  this  system,  as 
they  thought,  unjustly  assailed,  Howe  arose  in  its  defence ;  and 
Sumner  followed  him  with  a  few  impromptu  remarks.  The 
discussion  their  remarks  provoked,  led  to  the  appointment  of  a 
committee,  which  included  both  Howe  and  Sumner,  to  visit 
the  Philadelphia  prisons  and  make  a  detailed  report,  from 
actual  observation,  of  their  operation.  The  results  of  his  ob 
servation  Sumner  embodied  in  an  article  published  two  years 
later,  in  the  Christian  Examiner,  upon  the  occasion  of  the 
erection  of  a  new  jail  in  Boston.  He  then  urged  with  some 
earnestness  the  adoption  of  the  system  of  separate  confinement 
of  criminals  as  pursued  in  the  penitentiaries  and  some  of  the 
jails  of  Pennsylvania. 


CHAPTER    XIII 

CHOSEN"  ORATOR  FOR  JULY  4,  1845 — THE  OCCASION THE  ORA 
TION  ON  "  THE  TRUE  GRANDEUR  OF  NATIONS  " THE  PUB 
LIC  DINNER ESTIMATES  OF  THE  ORATION JUDGE  STORY'S 

DEATH — SUMNER'S  TRIBUTE 

IN  1845,  Sumner  was  chosen  to  deliver  the  Fourth  of  July 
oration  before  the  authorities  and  citizens  of  Boston.  The 
occasion  had  been  regularly  celebrated,  with  this  oration  and 
other  appropriate  exercises,  each  year  since  the  close  of  the 
Revolutionary  War.  In  no  other  place  had  more  been  made  of 
the  occasion  than  in  Boston.  It  had  early  been  recognized  by 
the  mother  country  as  the  most  rebellious  and  defiant  city  of 
the  colonies  and  repressive  measures  were  there  soonest  tried 
to  reduce  her  to  subjection,  but  the  more  repressive  the 
measures,  the  higher  rose  the  spirit  of  resistance  among  her 
people.  It  was  in  her  harbor  that  the  British  tea  was  thrown 
overboard.  This  tea  was  treated  by  the  colonists  as  the  first 
appearance  of  articles  of  their  consumption,  on  which  they  were 
to  be  taxed  without  representation.  On  her  streets,  in  the  Bos 
ton  Massacre,  the  first  blood  of  the  struggle  was  shed,  and  in 
her  neighborhood,  at  Lexington  and  Concord,  were  the  earliest 
skirmishes  of  the  Revolution ;  and,  on  her  Bunker  Hill,  the  first 
organized  battle,  between  the  raw  militia  of  the  colonists  and 
the  disciplined  troops  of  Great  Britain,  was  fought.  In  the  war 
which  followed  Massachusetts  furnished  one  soldier  for  every 
three  enlisted. 

Such  facts  supplied  much  inspiration  for  a  Fourth  of  July 
oration.  Among  a  people,  who  have  always  felt  a  just  pride  in 
them,  a  sympathetic  audience  was  always  to  be  found.  The 
orators  selected  for  the  occasion,  had  usually  been  men  of  about 
Sumner's  age.  It  was  a  good  opportunity  for  a  young  man  to 
show  the  material  that  was  in  him  ;  for  to  the  large  audience, 
before  which  he  appeared,  there  was  to  be  added  the  much 
larger,  to  which  the  printed  address  afterwards  went;  it  being 
the  custom  for  the  city  to  publish  the  orations,  after  their 
delivery. 

Sumner  was  notified  of  his  appointment  on  April  twenty- 
fourth.  At  first,  probably  mistrusting  his  fitness  for  the  place 

140 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

he  was  disposed  to  decline  it.  But  Hillard,  Howe,  Peleg  W. 
Chandler  and  other  friends  urged  him  to  accept  it  and  he  did. 
He  then  encountered  some  difficulty  in  the  choice  of  a  subject. 
Almost  three  years  before,  in  acknowledging  the  receipt  of  a 
copy  of  his  Fourth  of  July  oration  from  Rev.  Edgar  Bucking 
ham,  Sumner  wrote: 

"  I  thank  you  very  much  for  the  oration  you  were  so  good 
as  to  send  me.  I  admire  the  frankness  and  spirit  with  which, 
you  turned  the  celebration  of  the  Fourth  of  July  to  an  occasion 
for  moral  improvement.  I  wish  that  forever  this  day  might 
be  set  apart  throughout  the  whole  country  as  the  National  Sab 
bath,  to  be  employed  in  earnest  inquiry  into  the  real  condition 
of  public  affairs,  and  in  strengthening  the  foundations  of  moral 
principles  and  of  concord.  It  should  not  be  ushered  in  by  the 
sound  and  smoke  of  cannons.  Let  it  be  a  day  of  peace,  and  of 
those  thoughts  that  flow  from  peace." 

The  orator  had  turned  aside  from  the  ordinary  review  of  the 
events  which  led  up  to  the  struggle  and  the  events  of  the  war 
and  the  customary  eulogy  of  the  valor  of  the  American  troops, 
which  has  made  the  name  of  Fourth  of  July  oratory  synonymous 
with  fulsome  and  spread-eagle  speech,  to  the  existing  condition 
of  the  country  and  some  growing  evils,  for  which  a  remedy 
should  be  found.  Among  these  he  instanced  slavery,  a  part  of 
the  oration  which,  Sumner  wrote  him,  he  particularly  liked  and 
hoped  would  be  "responded  to  by  the  universal  heart  of  the 
North."  An  incidental  protest  too,  against  devoting  the  day 
to  thoughts  of  war  and  military  glory,  instead  of  moral  and 
intellectual  improvement,  attracted  the  attention  of  Sumner, 
when  in  search  of  a  subject  and  probably  determined  his  choice. 

The  title  of  his  oration  was  "  The  True  Grandeur  of  Na 
tions".  It  was  in  fact,  an  eloquent  plea  for  universal  peace. 
This  was  a  subject,  as  we  have  already  seen,  that  had  interested 
Sumner  for  years.  His  letters  contained  frequent  references 
to  it,  as  called  forth  by  occasion,  and  whenever  he  expressed 
himself  he  showed  how  deep  were  his  convictions.  The  annexa 
tion  of  Texas  which  was  then  being  much  discussed,  as  a  pend 
ing  national  question,  and  which  was  consummated  the  same 
summer,  then  threatened,  and  was  shortly  after  followed,  by 
the  Mexican  War,  inspired  by  the  hardly  concealed  purpose, 
on  the  part  of  its  chief  supporters,  of  acquiring  more  territory, 
out  of  which  to  carve  slave  states,  gave  at  the  time  a  very 
practical  turn  to  the  thoughts  in  Sumner's  oration.  There  was 
also  talk  of  war,  growing  out  of  the  Oregon  boundary  troubles, 
with  England. 


142  LIFE  OF  CHARLE8  SUMNER 

The  occasion  was  all  that  any  one  could  wish.  The  day 
dawned  a  beautiful  one,  and  was  ushered  in,  with  the  booming 
of  cannon,  the  ringing  of  bells  and  the  firing  of  crackers  by 
boys  in  the  streets  and  upon  the  Common.  The  city  was  gayly 
decorated  with  flags  and  bunting  and  its  streets  were  soon  alive 
with  its  population,  in  holiday  attire,  and  with  people,  who  had 
come  in  from  the  surrounding  country,  to  unite  in  the  celebra 
tion.  The  IT.  S.  battle-ship  Ohio,  then  stationed  in  the  harbor, 
was  also  decorated  with  flags  to  the  water's  edge  and  fired 
guns  at  intervals.  An  effort  had  been  made  to  make  the  mili 
tary  display  greater  than  ever  before.  The  U.  S.  troops  sta 
tioned  at  the  neighboring  fortifications,  the  crew  of  the  Ohio 
and  the  local  militia,  had  all  been  invited  to  participate. 

Promptly  at  ten  and  one-half  o'clock  the  procession  headed 
by  Sumner  and  the  Mayor,  followed  by  the  city  council,  the 
military  and  naval  organizations,  in  full  uniform,  with  bris 
tling  bayonets  and  arms  gleaming  in  the  sunshine,  attended  by 
bands  of  martial  music,  marched  from  the  City  Hall  to  Tre- 
mont  Temple,  where  the  exercises  were  held.  The  hall  was  soon 
filled  by  an  audience  of  two  thousand  people.  A  choir  of  a 
hundred  voices,  composed  of  children,  selected  from  the  public 
schools,  all  dressed  in  white,  occupied  the  rear  of  the  stage, 
while  the  front  was  occupied  by  distinguished  men.  The  mili 
tary  occupied  the  front  seats.  After  an  invocation  by  the  min 
ister,  the  reading  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and  a 
song  by  the  choir,  Sumner  was  introduced. 

As  he  stepped  out  upon  the  stage,  and,  as  it  afterwards 
proved,  into  public  life,  he  appeared  the  embodiment  of  manly 
beauty.  He  stood  six  feet  three  inches  in  height,  weighing  about 
one  hundred  and  seventy-five  pounds.  In  his  earlier  years  he 
had  grown  rapidly  and  was  tall  and  very  slender  and  somewhat 
stooped,  but  this  had  now  disappeared  and  he  stood  before  his 
audience  erect,  handsomely  proportioned,  a  splendid  specimen 
of  vigorous  manhood.  He  wore  a  dress-coat,  with  brass  buttons 
after  the  fashion  of  that  time,  with  white  waistcoat  and 
trousers.  He  commenced  his  oration,  in  a  measured  tone  of 
voice,  yet  loud  enough  to  be  heard  throughout  the  hall: 

"  In  accordance  with  uninterrupted  usage,  on  this  Sabbath  of 
the  Nation,  we  have  put  aside  our  daily  cares,  and  seized  a  res 
pite  from  the  never-ending  toils  of  life,  to  meet  in  gladness  and 
congratulation,  mindful  of  the  blessings  transmitted  from  the 
Past,  mindful  also,  I  trust,  of  our  duties  to  the  Present  and  the 
Future." 

"  All  hearts  turn  first  to  the  Fathers  of  the  Republic.  Their 
venerable  forms  rise  before  us,  in  the  procession  of  successive 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  143 

generations.  They  come  fr.om  the  frozen  rock  of  Plymouth, 
from  the  wasted  bands  of  Raleigh,  from  the  heavenly  com 
panionship  of  Penn,  from  the  anxious  councils  of  the  Revolu 
tion, — from  all  those  fields  of  sacrifice,  where  in  obedience  to 
the  spirit  of  their  age,  they  sealed  their  devotion  to  duty  with 
their  blood.  They  say  to  us  their  children ;  Cease  to  vaunt  what 
you  do,  and  what  has  been  done  for  you.  Learn  to  walk  meekly 
and  to  think  humbly.  Cultivate  habits  of  self-sacrifice.  Never 
aim  at  what  is  not  right,  persuaded  that  without  this,  every 
possession  and  all  knowledge  will  become  an  evil  and  a  shame, 
and  may  these  words  of  ours  be  ever  in  your  minds !  Strive  to 
increase  the  inheritance  we  have  bequeathed  to  you, — bearing  in 
mind  always,  that,  if  we  excel  you  in  virtue,  such  a  victory  will 
be  to  us  a  mortification,  while  defeat  will  bring  happiness.  In 
this  way  you  may  conquer  us.  Nothing  is  more  shameful  for  a 
man  than  a  claim  to  esteem,  not  on  his  own  merits,  but  on  the 
fame  of  his  ancestors.  The  glory  of  the  fathers  is  doubtless  to 
their  children  a  most  precious  treasure ;  but  to  enjoy  it  without 
transmission  to  the  next  generation,  and  without  addition  is  the 
extreme  of  ignominy.  Following  these  counsels,  when  your  days 
on  earth  are  finished,  you  will  come  to  join  us  and  we  shall 
receive  you  as  friend  receives  friend;  but  if  you  neglect  our 
words,  expect  no  happy  greeting  from  us." 

"  Honor  to  the  memory  of  our  fathers !  May  the  turf  lie 
lightly  on  their  sacred  graves  !  Not  in  words  only,  but  in  deeds 
also,  let  us  testify  our  reverence  for  their  name,  imitating  what 
in  them  was  lofty,  pure  and  good,  learning  from  them  to  bear 
hardship  and  privation.  May  we,  who  now  reap  in  strengtli 
what  they  sowed  in  weakness,  augment  the  inheritance  we  have 
received !  To  this  end  we  must  not  fold  our  hands  in  slumber, 
nor  abide  content  with  the  past.  To  each  generation  is  ap 
pointed  its  peculiar  task ;  nor  does  the  heart  which  responds  to 
the  call  of  duty  find  rest  except  in  the  grave." 

With  this  general  introduction  and  brief  reference  to  the 
past,  he  turned  to  the  future.  There  was  no  further  reference 
to  the  Revolution  or  the  past  of  the  Republic  or  the  career  of  the 
Colonists,  except  only  one  or  two  and  these  the  briefest,  and 
by  way  of  illustrating  his  argument.  Once  he  referred  to  the 
peaceable  example  of  William  Penn  in  his  treatment  of  the  In 
dians,  in  whose  footprints  smiled  "  the  flowers  of  prosperity  ", 
his  people  "unmolested  and  happy,  while  (sad  but  true  con 
trast!)  other  colonies,  acting  upon  the  policy  of  the  world, 
building  forts  and  showing  themselves  in  arms,  were  harassed  by 
perpetual  alarm,  and  pierced  by  the  sharp  arrows  of  savage 
war."  Again  he  insisted  that  Washington  did  not  rise  "  to  a 


144  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

truly  heavenly  stature  ",  when  crossing  the  Delaware,  through 
ice,  to  capture  Trenton,  nor  when  victorious  over  Cornwallis  at 
Yorktown,  but  when  "  in  noble  deference  to  justice,  refusing  the 
kingly  crown."  He  laid  ours  as  he  did  other  history  under 
tribute  to  illustrate  his  argument,  but  for  this  only  he  looked  to 
the  past ;  his  interest  was  with  the  future.  The  question  before 
him  was :  "  What  can  we  do  to  make  our  coming  welcome  to  our 
fathers  in  the  skies  and  draw  to  our  memory  hereafter  the 
homage  of  a  grateful  posterity  ? "  He  proposed  to  consider 
"  what  in  our  age  are  the  true  objects  of  national  ambition, — 
what  is  truly  National  Honor,  National  Glory  ?  " 

He  was  prompt  to  declare  that  this  question  was  of  urgent 
interest  from  transactions  in  which  they  were  then  involved. 
"  By  an  act  of  unjust  legislation,  extending  our  power  over 
Texas/'  he  declared,  "  peace  with  Mexico  is  endangered, — 
while  by  petulant  assertion  of  a  disputed  claim  to  a  remote  ter 
ritory  beyond  the  Bocky  Mountains,  ancient  fires  of  hostile 
strife  are  kindled  anew  on  the  hearth  of  our  mother  country. 
Mexico  and  England  both  avow  the  determination  to  vindicate 
what  is  called  the  National  Honor ;  and  our  Government  calmly 
contemplates  the  dread  Arbitrament  of  War,  provided  it  cannot 
obtain  what  is  called  an  honorable  peace." 

"  Far  from  our  nation  and  our  age  be  the  sin  and  shame  of 
contests  hateful  in  the  sight  of  God  and  all  good  men,  having 
their  origin  in  no  righteous  sentiment,  no  true  love  of  country, 
no  generous  thirst  for  fame, '  that  last  infirmity  of  noble  minds  ' 
but  springing  manifestly  from  an  ignorant  and  ignoble  passion 
for  new  territory,  strengthened,  in  our  case,  in  a  republic,  whose 
star  is  Liberty,  by  unnatural  desire  to  add  new  links  in  chains 
destined  yet  to  fall  from  the  limbs  of  the  unhappy  slave !  In 
such  contrasts  God  has  no  attribute  which  can  join  with  us. 
Who  believes  that  the  national  honor  would  be  promoted  by  a 
war  with  Mexico  or  a  war  with  England  ?"..."  A  war  with 
Mexico  would  be  mean  and  cowardly,  with  England  it  would  be 
bold  at  least,  though  parricidal/' 

As  the  orator  proceeded,  he  warmed  to  his  subject,  his  voice 
became  clearer  and  louder,  rising  and  falling  in  easy  cadences, 
filling  the  hall  and  holding  the  undivided  attention  of  his  great 
audience;  his  gestures,  apparently  unstudied,  were  free  and 
emphasized  his  meaning;  his  manner  uniformly  gave  the  im 
pression  of  sincerity  and  deep  earnestness  and  occasionally,  as 
he  recounted  the  horrors  and  wastefulness  of  war,  amounted  to 
intensity. 

He  spoke  for  two  hours,  entirely  from  memory,  unaided  by 
notes,  except  for  figures  and  statistics.  The  oration  seemed 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  145 

to  impress  the  audience  as  unusual  and  worthy  of  an  attentive 
hearing,  once  or  twice,  as  when  he  intruded  upon  the  politics 
of  some  of  his  hearers,  by  attacking  the  course  of  the  adminis 
tration,  in  the  annexation  of  Texas,  or  made  an  illustration  of 
the  likeness  of  a  wild  beast,  which  one  of  the  military  organiza 
tions  present,  wore  as  a  device,  a  stir  of  disapproval  appeared; 
but  it  quickly  gave  place  to  respectful  deference  to  the  manifest 
sincerity  and  candor  of  the  speaker. 

He  dwelt  first  on  the  brutal  and  debasing  character  of  war, 
the  misery  it  entailed,  cutting  the  peaceful  bands  of  commerce 
that  bind  mankind  together,  man  to  man  and  nation  to  nation, 
and  scattering,  as  a  pestilence,  the  earth,  with  death  and  wasting 
despair.  He  condemned  it  as  utterly  insufficient  to  settle  any 
question  of  justice  or  injustice,  of  right  or  wrong.  He  then 
considered  the  prejudices  by  which  it  is  sustained, — the  belief  in 
its  necessity,  the  practice  of  nations  and  even  of  Christian 
ministers  in  upholding  it,  "  the  point  of  honor,"  and  the  pride 
of  country.  He  emphasized  the  preparation  for  war,  in  time  of 
peace,  as  wasteful  and  unnecessary.  He  inquired  in  succession 
of  what  use  was  the  army,  the  fortifications  and  the  militia? 
He  denounced  with  unsparing  words  the  maxim  "  in  time  of 
peace  prepare  for  war."  He  bade  all  hail  the  day  when  Peace, 
with  its  blessings  of  intellectual  and  moral  supremacy,  would 
dawn  upon  the  world  and  the  nations  learn  war  no  more ! 

The  climax  of  the  oration  was  reached  when  he  drew  a  com- 
parison  between  the  literary  and  charitable  institutions  of  Mas 
sachusetts  and  the  battleship  Ohio,  then  lying  in  the  harbor,  and 
other  U.  S.  war  vessels.  His  audience  was  familiar  with  the 
good  work,  which  these  institutions  had  done,  in  the  community, 
and  knew  something  of  the  extent  of  their  endowments;  but 
few  of  them  knew  the  costs  of  construction  and  of  the  main 
tenance  of  the  battleship.  They  were,  therefore,  not  prepared 
for  the  comparison  he  made  and  the  practical  lesson  he  drew 
from  it,  of  the  cost  of  war.  It  made  a  decided  impression. 

"  Within  cannon  range  of  this  city  stands  an  institution  of 
learning/'  he  said,  "  which  was  one  of  the  earliest  cares  of  our 
forefathers,  the  conscientious  Puritans.  Favored  child  in  an 
age  of  trial  and  struggle,  carefully  nursed  through  a  period  of 
hardship  and  anxiety, — endowed  at  the  time  by  the  oblations  of 
men  like  Harvard, — sustained  from  its  foundation  by  the  pa 
rental  arm  of  the  Commonwealth,  by  a  constant  succession  of 
munificent  bequests,  and  by  the  prayers  of  good  men, — the 
University  of  Cambridge  now  invites  our  homage  as  the  most 
ancient,  most  interesting  and  most  important  seat  of  learning 
in  the  land, — possessing  the  oldest  and  most  valuable  library, 


146  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

one  of  the  largest  museums  of  mineralogy  and  natural  history, 
— with  a  School  of  Law,  which  annually  receives  into  its  bosom 
more  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  sons  from  all  parts  of  the 
Union,  where  they  listen  to  instruction  from  professors  whose 
names  are  among  the  most  valuable  possessions  of  the  land, — 
also  a  School  of  Divinity,  fount  of  true  learning  and  piety, — 
also  one  of  the  largest  and  most  flourishing  Schools  of  Medicine 
in  the  country, — and  besides  these,  a  general  body  of  teachers, 
twenty-seven  in  number,  many  of  whose  names  help  to  keep  the 
name  of  the  country  respectable  in  every  part  of  the  globe,  where 
science,  learning  and  taste  are  cherished, — the  whole  presided 
over  at  this  moment  by  a  gentleman  (Hon.  Josiah  Quincy)  early 
distinguished  in  public  life  by  unconquerable  energy  and  mas 
culine  eloquence,  at  a  later  period  by  the  unsurpassed  ability 
with  which  he  adminstered  the  affairs  of  our  city,  and  now,  in  a 
green  old  age,  full  of  years  and  honors,  preparing  to  lay  down 
his  present  high  trust.  Such  is  Harvard  University,  and  as 
one  of  the  humblest  of  her  children,  happy  in  the  memories  of 
a  youth  nurtured  in  her  classic  retreats,  I  cannot  allude  to  her 
without  an  expression  of  filial  affection  and  respect." 

"  It  appears  from  the  last  Report  of  the  Treasurer  that  the 
whole  available  property  of  the  University,  the  various  accu 
mulation  of  more  than  two  centuries  of  generosity,  amounts  to 
$703,175." 

"  Change  the  scene,  and  cast  your  eyes  upon  another  object. 
There  now  swings  idly  at  her  moorings  in  this  harbor  a  ship 
of  the  line,  the  Ohio,  carrying  ninety  guns,  finished  as  late  as 
1836,  at  an  expense  of  $547,888, — repaired  only  two  years 
afterwards,  in  1838,  for  $233,012,  with  an  armament  which  has 
cost  $53,915, — making  an  aggregate  of  $834,845,  as  the  actual 
outlay  at  this  moment  for  that  single  ship, — more  than  $100,- 
000,  beyond  all  the  available  wealth  of  the  richest  and  most 
ancient  seat  of  learning  in  the  land !  Choose  ye,  my  fellow- 
citizens  of  a  Christian  State,  between  the  two  caskets, — that 
wherein  is  the  loveliness  of  truth,  or  that  which  contains  the 
carrion  of  death." 

"  I  refer  to  the  Ohio  because  this  ship  happens  to  be  in  our 
waters;  but  I  do  not  take  the  strongest  case  afforded  by  our 
Navy.  Other  ships  have  absorbed  larger  sums.  The  expense  of 
the  Delaware,  in  1842,  had  reached  $1,051,000." 

"  Pursue  the  comparison  still  further.  The  expenditures  of 
the  University  during  the  last  year,  for  the  general  purposes  of 
the  College,  the  instruction  of  the  undergraduates ;  and  for  the 
Schools  of  Law  and  Divinity,  amounted  to  $47,935.  The  cost 
of  the  Ohio  for  one  year  of  service,  in  salaries,  wages  and  provi- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  147 

sions  is  $220,000, — being  $172,000  above  the  annual  expendi 
tures  of  the  University,,  and  more  than  four  times  as  much  as 
those  expenditures.  In  other  words  for  the  annual  sum  lavished 
on  a  single  ship  of  the  line,  four  institutions  like  Harvard  Uni 
versity  might  be  supported." 

"  Furthermore,  the  pay  of  a  captain  of  a  ship  like  the  Ohio  is 
$4,500,  when  in  the  service, — $3,500,  when  on  leave  of  absence, 
or  off  duty.  The  salary  of  the  President  of  Harvard  University 
is  $2,235,  without  leave  of  absence  and  never  off  duty." 

"  If  the  large  endowments  of  Harvard  University  are  dwarfed 
by  comparison  with  a  single  ship  of  the  line,  how  must  it  be  with 
other  institutions  of  learning  and  beneficence,  less  favored  by 
the  bounty  of  many  generations?  The  average  cost  of  a  sloop 
of  war  is  $315,000, — more  probably  than  all  the  endowments  of 
those  twin  stars  of  learning  in  the  Western  part  of  Massachu 
setts,  the  Colleges  at  Williamstown  and  Amherst,  and  of  that 
single  star  in  the  East,  the  guide  to  many  ingenuous  youth,  the 
Seminary  at  Andover.  The  yearly  expense  of  a  sloop  of  war  in 
the  service  is  about  $50,000,  more  than  the  annual  expenditures 
of  these  three  institutions  combined." 

"  I  might  press  the  comparison  with  other  institutions  of 
beneficence, — with  our  annual  appropriations  for  the  Blind, 
that  noble  and  successful  charity  which  sheds  luster  upon  the 
Commonwealth,  amounting  to  $12,000,  and  for  the  Insane,  an 
other  charity  dear  to  humanity,  amounting  to  $27,844." 

"  Take  all  the  institutions  of  Learning  and  Beneficence,  the 
crown  jewels  of  the  Commonwealth,  schools,  colleges,  hospitals, 
asylums,  and  the  sums  by  which  they  have  been  purchased  and 
preserved  are  trivial  and  beggarly,  compared  with  the  treasures 
squandered  within  the  borders  of  Massachusetts  in  vain  prep 
arations  for  War, — and  upon  the  Navy  Yard  at  Charlestown, 
with  its  stores  on  hand,  costing  $4,741,000, — the  fortifications 
in  the  harbors  of  Massachusetts,  where  untold  sums  are  already 
sunk,  and  it  is  now  proposed  to  sink  $3,875,000  more, — and  the 
Arsenal  at  Springfield,  containing  in  1842,  175,118  muskets, 
valued  at  $2,099,998,  and  maintained  by  an  annual  appropria 
tion  of  $200,000,  whose  highest  value  will  ever  be,  in  the  judg 
ment  of  all  lovers  of  truth,  that  it  inspired  a  poem  which  in  in 
fluence  will  be  mightier  than  a  battle,  and  will  endure  when 
arsenals  and  fortifications  have  crumbled  to  earth.  Some  of 
the  verses  of  this  Psalm  of  Peace  relieve  the  details  of  statistics, 
while  they  happily  blend  with  my  argument." 

tt  <  -\Yere  half  the  power  that  fills  the  world  with  terror, 
Were  half  the  wealth  bestowed  on  camps  and  courts, 


148  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

Given  to  redeem  the  human  mind  from  error, 
There  were  no  need  of  arsenals  or  forts ; 

The  warrior's  name  would  be  a  name  abhorred, 

And  every  nation  that  should  lift  again 
Its  hand  against  a  brother  on  his  forehead 

Would  wear  forever  more  the  curse  of  Cain.' " 

Sumner  came  directly  to  the  answer  of  the  question  pro 
pounded  in  his  subject,  The  True  Grandeur  of  Nations,  when 
near  the  close  of  his  oration,  he  said :  "  The  True  Greatness  of 
a  Nation  cannot  be  in  triumphs  of  the  intellect  alone.  Litera 
ture  and  art  may  enlarge  the  sphere  of  its  influence ;  they  may 
adorn  it;  but  in  their  nature  they  are  but  accessories.  The  True 
Grandeur  of  Humanity  is  in  the  moral  elevation,  sustained,  en 
lightened  and  decorated  by  the  intellect  of  man.  The  surest 
tokens  of  this  grandeur  in  a  nation  are  that  Christian  Benefi 
cence  which  diffuses  the  greatest  happiness  among  all,  and  that 
passionless,  god-like  Justice  which  controls  the  relations  of  the 
nation  to  other  nations,  and  to  all  the  people  committed  to  its 
charge.  .  .  ." 

"  Oh,  let  it  not  be  in  the  future  ages  as  in  those  we  now  con 
template  !  Let  the  grandeur  of  man  be  discerned,  not  in  bloody 
victory  or  ravenous  conquest  but  in  the  blessing  he  has  secured, 
in  the  good  he  has  accomplished,  in  the  triumphs  of  Justice 
and  Beneficence,  in  the  establishment  of  Perpetual  Peace !  " 

Sumner  did  not  claim  that  all  wars  were  wrong;  for  he  ex- 
cepted  defensive  wars,  occurring  when  a  nation  was  unjustly 
assailed  and  no  recourse  was  left  it,  but  self-defence  or  destruc 
tion.  He  believed  that,  however  wrong  on  the  part  of  the  ag 
gressor,  it  was  the  duty  of  the  nation  thus  assailed  to  defend 
itself.  But  he  fearlessly  maintained  that  every  act  of  aggression 
by  one  nation  upon  another,  on  some  frivolous  pretext,  but  in 
reality  for  the  acquisition  of  territory,  that  did  not  rightfully 
belong  to  it,  was  morally  wrong.  He  maintained  that  a  nation, 
like  an  individual,  was  answerable  for  it,  in  the  sight  of  God 
and  all  good  men. 

The  illustrations  that  he  had  in  mind  were  the  prospective 
wars  with  Mexico  and  England,  growing  out  of  our  claims  in 
Texas  and  Oregon.  He  thought  both  claims  were  without  right 
ful  foundations  and  that  Texas  was  sought  to  secure  the  exten 
sion  of  slavery,  to  which  he  was  unalterably  opposed.  The 
Oregon  dispute  was  soon  afterward  settled  by  peaceful  negotia 
tions.  But  Texas  was  annexed  and  the  Mexican  War  followed, 
it  became  a  slave  state,  a  part  of  her  territory  was  incorporated 
in  Kansas,  also  sought  to  be  made  a  slave  state;  other  parts 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  149 

went  to  make  up  Xew  Mexico,  Indian  Territory  and  Colorado, 
ominous  locations;  the  parent  territory  became  one  of  the 
seceding  Confederate  States  and  sustained  with  her  blood  and 
treasure  the  War  of  the  Rebellion,  a  consummation,  which  even 
the  anxious  eye  of  Sumner  did  not  then  foresee,  in  its  entirety. 
But  he  saw  enough  to  condemn  the  project  unsparingly.  Orig 
inally  a  part  of  Mexico  and  for  only  a  few  years  maintaining 
a  disputed  and  uncertain  independence,  he  believed  the  United 
States  should  not  be  permitted  to  become  embroiled  in  the 
troubles  of  Texas  so  as  to  create  a  pretext  for  her  annexation. 

To  take  what  did  not  belong  to  a  man,  merely  by  right  of 
superior  strength,  he  believed  to  be  robbery;  and  he  did  not 
esteem  it  anything  less  when  accomplished  by  the  aggregation 
of  men  composing  a  nation.  The  numbers  engaged  could  not 
change  the  morality  of  the  act  in  his  eyes  and  for  such  cause 
he  would  not  silently  see  the  treasure  of  the  nation  consumed. 
He  thought  the  maintenance  of  such  a  war  establishment  as  the 
United  States  then  had,  in  time  of  peace,  when  no  enemy  was 
near,  encouraged  her  to  seek  such  occasions  to  show  her  strength 
and  should  be  abolished ;  and  the  treasure  thus  expended  saved 
for  the  promotion  of  intelligence,  righteousness  and  religion. 

His  speech  was  an  eloquent  plea  for  universal  peace,  a  condi 
tion  generally  considered  to  be  far  beyond  the  reach  of  living 
generations;  but  it  was  an  urgent  appeal  to  all  that  is  best  in 
our  nature  to  lend  its  aid  to  this  cause.  The  oration  revealed 
a  lofty  nature,  filled  with  the  love  of  justice,  and  morality, 
a  cultured  mind,  stored  with  the  rich  fruits  of  hard  study,  a 
high  ideal,  placing  its  standard  far  in  advance  of  the  position 
of  its  own  generation  and  a  determined  purpose  to  bring  civ 
ilization  up  to  it.  It  was  an  earnest  of  Sumner's  life-work. 

But  the  oration  did  not  meet  with  universal  approval.  At 
the  public  dinner,  given  in  Faneuil  Hall,  immediately  after  the 
exercises  in  Tremont  Temple,  the  feeling  of  dissent,  that  had 
so  far  been  hardly  concealed,  broke  out  and  composed  the 
burden  of  the  responses,  to  a  number  of  the  toasts.  The  officers 
of  the  military  and  naval  organizations,  that  had  taken  part  in 
the  parade,  at  first  hesitated,  but  finally  consented  to  be  present 
at  the  dinner.  Sumner  had  made  some  unrelished  allusions 
to  them.  Referring  to  the  militia  he  had,  for  example,  said : 
"And  when  the  youth  becomes  a  man,  his  country  invites  his 
services  in  war  and  holds  before  his  bewildered  imagination,  the 
prizes  of  worldly  honor.  .  .  .  The  contagion  spreads  beyond 
those  subjects  to  positive  obligation.  Peaceful  citizens  volun 
teer  to  appear  as  soldiers,  and  affect  in  dress,  arms  and  deport 
ment,  what  is  called  the  '  pride,  pomp  and  circumstance  of 


150  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

glorious  war.'  The  ear-piercing  fife  has  to-day  filled  our  streets 
and  we  have  come  to  this  church,  on  this  National  Sabbath,  at 
tended  by  the  thump  of  drum  and  with  the  parade  of  bristling 
bayonets."  This  and  some  similar  allusions  were  resented  by 
the  soldiers.  Having  been  invited  to  be  present  and  take  part, 
these  references  were  regretted  by  some  of  the  audience. 

This  may  have  influenced  some  of  the  speakers  at  the  dinner. 
Simmer's  friend,  John  G.  Palfrey,  led  off  in  the  dissent,  and 
he  was  followed  by  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  who  closed  by  an 
nouncing  this  toast,  afterwards  somewhat  notorious :  "  Our 
country,  bounded  by  the  St.  John's  and  the  Sabine,  or  however 
otherwise  bounded  or  described ;  and  be  the  measurements  more 
or  less,  still  our  country  to  be  cherished  in  all  our  hearts,  to  be 
defended  by  all  our  hands."  Others  followed ;  some  of  them  ap 
proaching  coarseness  in  their  allusions  to  the  oration;  and  even 
these  received  unmistakable  evidence  of  approbation  from  their 
hearers.  Sumner  sat  by  Winthrop  and  heard  all,  apparently 
without  resentment  and  with  hardly  any  perceptible  embarrass 
ment.  In  his  own  thoughts,  he  probably  felt  content  to  leave 
the  issue  with  the  larger  audience,  by  which  he  hoped  his  effort 
would  live  to  be  tried. 

At  the  close,  Peleg  W.  Chandler,  who  presided,  sought  "to 
pour  oil  on  the  troubled  waters/'  by  some  good-humored  refer 
ences  to  the  oration  and  the  toasts,  that  caused  a  little  merri 
ment  and  restored  a  better  feeling.  He  then  announced  the 
toast :  "  The  orator  of  the  day !  However  much  we  may  differ 
from  his  sentiments,  let  us  admire  the  simplicity,  manliness 
and  ability  with  which  he  has  expressed  them."  Sumner  re 
sponded  briefly,  saying  he  would  not  follow  with  one  word  the 
apple  of  discord,  he  seemed  to  have  thrown  into  the  exercises  of 
the  occasion,  and  closed  by  adding  that,  however  much  they 
might  differ  as  to  the  principles  he  had  advocated,  he  was  sure 
there  was  one  sentiment  they  would  all  approve  and  that  was 
admiration  for  the  youthful  choristers,  who  had  gladdened  the 
occasion,  with  the  music  of  their  voices.  He  proposed  the  toast : 
"The  youthful  choristers  of  the  day!  May  their  future  lives 
be  filled  with  happiness,  as  they  have  to-day  filled  our  hearts 
with  the  delight  of  their  music  !  " 

The  dignity  with  which  he  bore  himself,  the  absence  of  all 
appearance  of  resentment  and  the  tact  with  which  he  turned 
discussion  from  himself  helped  to  disarm  criticism  and  left  a 
favorable  impression  upon  those  present  at  the  dinner,  though 
he  had  not  retracted  any  of  his  previously  expressed  convictions. 

The  impression  made  by  the  oration  upon  the  general  public 
was  a  remarkable  one.  The  demand  for  printed  copies  was  un- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  151 

precedented.  Eight  editions  of  it  were  issued  in  America  and 
two  in  England,  within  a  year,  making  about  ten  thousand 
copies  that  came  from  the  press  in  that  time.  Other  editions 
have  since  been  printed.  It  was  distributed  as  a  tract  by  the 
Peace  Societies  of  Boston,  Philadelphia,  Liverpool  and  London ; 
and  it  is  still  printed  for  this  purpose.  In  this  and  other  ways 
copies  of  it  were  distributed  systematically  to  many  newspapers 
in  America  and  Great  Britain  and  to  many  of  their  leading 
statesmen  and  publicists.  Many  of  the  newspapers  to  which  it 
was  sent,  noticed  it  and  some  of  them  printed  extracts  from  it, 
in  their  columns;  the  religious  papers  generally  approved  its 
doctrines  while  the  secular  ones  generally  criticised  them  as  im 
practicable  ;  but  all  that  discussed  it  agreed  in  commending  the 
learning  and  eloquence  which  it  displayed. 

The  same  remarkable  character  of  the  oration  was  attested 
by  private  communications  which  Sumner  received.  But  many 
of  these  frankly  expressed  dissent.  Old  Jeremiah  Mason, 
always  original  and  always  to  the  point,  bluntly  told  him  that 
"  an  anti-war  society  is  as  little  practicable  as  an  anti-thunder- 
and-lightning  society." 

William  H.  Prescott  wrote,  he  could  not  go  along  with  him 
in  the  expression  of  the  sentiment,  "  There  can  be  no  war  that  is 
not  dishonorable  ",  when  he  remembered  Marathon,  Morgarten, 
Bannockburn,  Bunker  Hill,  the  wars  of  the  Low  Countries, — 
all  those  wars  which  have  had  and  which  are  yet  to  have  free 
dom  for  their  object.  "  I  can't  acquiesce  in  your  sweeping  de 
nunciation,  my  good  friend."  He  added,  ee  I  admire  your  moral 
courage  in  delivering  your  sentiments  so  plainly  in  the  face  of 
that  thick  array.  ...  I  may  one  day  see  you  on  a  crusade  to 
persuade  the  great  Autocrat  to  disband  his  millions  of  fighting 
men,  and  little  Queen  Vic  to  lay  up  her  steamships  in  lavender ! 
You  have  scattered  right  and  left  the  seeds  of  a  sound  and  en 
nobling  morality,  which  may  spring  up  in  a  bountiful  harvest, 
I  trust, — in  the  millennium;  but  I  doubt." 

John  A.  Andrew,  afterwards  the  War  Governor  of  Massa 
chusetts,  wrote,  in  different  vein :  "  You  will  allow  me  to  say 
that  I  have  read  the  oration  with  a  satisfaction  only  equalled  by 
that  with  which  I  heard  you  on  the  fourth  of  July.  And  while 
I  thank  you  a  thousand  times  for  the  choice  you  made  of  a  topic, 
as  well  as  for  the  fidelity  and  brilliant  ability  which  you  brought 
to  its  illustration,  (both  to  my  mind,  defying  the  most  carping 
criticism),  I  cannot  help  expressing  also  my  gratitude  to  Prov 
idence,  that  here  in  our  city  of  Boston,  one  has  at  last  stepped 
forward  to  consecrate  to  celestial  hopes  the  day — the  great  day 


152  LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

— which  Americans  have  at  best  heretofore  held  sacred  only  to 
memory." 

Judge  Story  wrote  thanking  him  for  a  copy  of  it  and  added: 
"  I  have  read  it  with  uncommon  interest  and  care,  as  you  might 
well  suppose,  as  well  on  your  own  account  as  from  the  various 
voices  of  fame  which  succeeded  the  delivery.  It  is  certainly  a 
very  striking  production,  and  will  fully  sustain  your  reputation 
for  high  talents,  various  reading  and  exact  scholarship.  There 
are  a  great  many  passages  in  it  which  are  wrought  out  with  an 
exquisite  finish  and  elegance  of  diction  and  classical  beauty.  I 
go  earnestly  and  heartily  along  with  many  of  your  sentiments 
and  opinions.  They  are  such  as  befit  an  exalted  mind  and  an 
enlarged  benevolence.  But  from  the  length  and  breadth  of 
your  doctrine  as  to  war,  I  am  compelled  to  dissent.  In  my  judg 
ment,  war  is  under  some  (although  I  agree,  not  under  many) 
circumstances,  not  only  justifiable  but  an  indispensable  part  of 
public  duty." 

"  I  have  spoken  in  all  frankness  to  you  because  I  know  that 
you  will  understand  your  friends  too  well  to  wish  them  to  sup 
press  their  own  opinions;  but  be  assured  that  no  one  cherishes 
with  more  fond  and  affectionate  pride  the  continual  advance 
ment  of  your  professional  and  literary  fame  than  myself,  and 
no  one  has  a  deeper  reverence  for  your  character  and  virtues. 
Believe  me,  as  ever,  most  truly  and  affectionately." 

It  will  be  noticed  that  these  are  expressions  from  men  of 
world-wide  reputation  upon  the  effort  of  a  young  gentleman 
hardly  past  thirty-four  years  of  age  on  his  first  studied  appear 
ance  before  a  popular  audience.  Sumner  received  many  other 
letters  from  persons,  at  home  and  abroad.  Perhaps  no  oration 
in  the  history  of  modern  literature  ever  had  a  success  at  once  so 
immediate  and  so  permanent. 

It  influenced  the  course  of  Sumner^s  life.  Until  the  fourth 
of  July,  1845,  he  had  not  known  the  powers  of  oratory  he  pos 
sessed,  but  that  day  brought  a  revelation  to  him  as  well  as  to 
the  public.  For  several  years,  a  disposition  to  despondency 
and  dissatisfaction  with  himself  and  with  his  past  in  life  had 
been  growing  upon  him ;  but  now  he  was  taught  that  he  had  a 
work  to  do  and  a  talent  for  it;  and  his  sadder  moods  became 
less  frequent,  His  relation  to  the  public  was  changed;  atten 
tion  had  been  attracted  to  him  and  there  was  a  desire  to  hear 
farther  from  him.  It  was  the  first  of  a  series  of  brilliant  ora 
tions  that  established  his  fame  and  carried  him 'to  a  seat  in  the 
U.  S.  Senate.  With  strict  propriety,  Sumner,  twenty-five  years 
later,  nearing  the  close  of  life  and  gathering  his  works  together, 
in  permanent  form,  placed  this  oration  first  in  the  collection. 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   8UMNER  153 

Whatever  he  had  written  or  said  before,  he  was  willing  to  let 
pass  into  oblivion,  but  with  this  oration  he  designated  that  his 
work  commenced. 

The  same  year  that  marked  Sumner's  appearance  before  the 
public  in  his  "  True  Grandeur  of  Nations,"  witnessed  the  loss 
of  his  earliest  and  best  friend.  Judge  Story  died  on  September 
tenth,  1845,  at  the  age  of  sixty-six,  stricken  down  in  the  full 
tide  of  his  usefulness.  He  had  been  thirty-four  years  a  judge  of 
the  U.  S.  Supreme  Court  and  sixteen  years  a  professor  in  the 
Law  School  at  Harvard.  Two  days  before  the  commencement 
of  his  illness,  he  was  in  court  and  pronounced  the  decision,  in  a 
complicated  case.  After  his  death,  another  was  found  among 
his  papers,  ready  for  delivery.  Eight  days  after  he  was  stricken, 
he  was  dead.  He  was  buried  in  Mount  Auburn  cemetery  at 
Cambridge  where  were  already  laid  his  children  who  had  pre 
ceded  him.  He  died  as  became  a  Christian,  with  a  prayer  on 
his  lips  that  his  Father  would  take  him  to  himself. 

This  closed  a  friendship  that  had  lasted  from  the  time  of 
Sumner's  earliest  recollection,  through  the  years  of  a  generation, 
without  a  jar.  Though  the  disparity  of  their  ages  may  suggest 
such  a  relation  between  them  as  that  of  father  and  son,  in 
reality  it  was  a  closer  relation  than  this  ordinarily  is.  The 
abounding  life  and  vivacity  of  the  judge,  his  hearty  sympathy 
with  the  young,  in  their  troubles  and  triumphs  and  ambitions, 
and  the  glamour  of  his  official  position,  with  the  respect  it  in 
spired,  had  attracted  Sumner  very  early  in  life  and  for  many 
years  he  had  seen  in  Judge  Story  his  ideal  of  a  man.  In  college ; 
in  the  law  school,  as  a  student  and  later  as  an  instructor;  in 
his  private  reading  and  his  recreations ;  in  his  thoughts  of  Eu 
rope,  in  securing  the  means  for  his  trip  and  in  opening  the 
doors  of  society  and  the  avenues  for  improvement  while  abroad ; 
and  still  later,  in  his  efforts  at  the  bar  and  in  literature,  Sumner 
had  always  found  in  Judge  Story  his  faithful  mentor  and 
friend.  Step  by  step  he  had  followed  him  with  more  than  a 
father's  care. 

But  he  was  destined  never  to  see  the  good  seed  he  had  sown 
ripen  into  its  full  harvest.  It  is  a  touching  thought  that,  where 
Sumner's  work  commenced,  this  faithful  friend's  ended.  The 
last  letter  of  importance  Judge  Story  wrote,  was  the  one  we  have 
quoted ;  and  the  touching  words  at  its  close,  comes  through  the 
lapse  of  years  like  a  parting  benediction :  "  be  assured  that  no 
one  cherishes  with  more  fond  and  affectionate  pride  the  con 
tinual  advancement  of  your  professional  and  literary  fame  than 
myself,  and  no  one  has  a  deeper  reverence  for  your  character 
and  virtues,"  and  then  the  last  word  of  paVting,  destined  to  be 


154  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  last  word  between  them,  "  affectionately/' — summing  up  in 
that  one  word  the  measure  he  felt  for  the  relation  thus  closed. 

The  second  production  in  Sumner's  Works  and  the  one  imme 
diately  following  the  fourth  of  July  oration  is  a  beautiful 
tribute  to  Judge  Story  which  Sumner  wrote  for  the  Boston 
Advertiser,  of  September  sixteenth,  1845,  "  I  have  just  re 
turned,"  it  commences,  "from  the  funeral  of  this  great  and 
good  man.  Under  that  roof  where  I  have  so  often  seen  him  in 
health,  buoyant  with  life,  exuberant  in  kindness,  happy  in 
family  and  friends,  I  have  stood  by  his  mortal  remains  sunk  in 
eternal  rest,  and  gazed  upon  those  well-loved  features,  from 
which  even  the  icy  touch  of  death  had  not  effaced  all  the  living 
beauty.  The  eye  was  quenched  and  the  glow  of  life  extin 
guished  ;  but  the  noble  brow  seemed  still  to  shelter,  as  under  a 
marble  dome,  the  spirit  that  had  fled.  And  is  he  dead,  I  asked 
myself, — whose  face  was  never  turned  to  me,  except  in  affection, 
—who  has  filled  the  civilized  world  with  his  name,  and  drawn  to 
his  country  the  homage  of  foreign  nations — and  who  was  of 
activity  and  labor  that  knew  no  rest, — who  was  connected  with 
so  many  circles  by  duties  of  such  various  kinds,  by  official  ties, 
by  sympathy,  by  friendship  and  love, — who  according  to  the 
beautiful  expression  of  Wilberforce,  '  touched  life  at  so  many 
points/  has  he,  indeed,  passed  away  ?  " 

In  early  life  Judge  Story  had  a  strong  taste  for  a  literary 
career  but  yielding  to  necessity  he  entered  upon  the  study  of 
law.  It  is  related  that  when  struggling  to  master  the  dry  pages 
of  Coke's  Commentaries  upon  Littleton,  the  first  textbook 
placed  in  his  hands,  he  gave  way  in  despair;  and  covering  his 
face  with  his  hands  at  the  prospect  in  life  that  confronted  him 
he  shed  a  copious  baptism  of  tears  upon  his  open  book.  From 
this  unpromising  entrance  on  the  law,  he  rose  to  be  a  judge  of 
the  highest  court  in  the  country,  the  leading  professor  in  Har 
vard  Law  School  and  the  author  of  one  of  the  most  widely 
celebrated  series  of  Law-books  known  to  the  common  law.  It 
was  upon  these  three  relations  of  judge,  author  and  teacher 
that  Sumner  dwelt. 

He  recalled  with  astonishment  the  extent  of  his  work,  the 
written  judgments  he  pronounced  upon  the  Circuit  and  his 
works  as  an  author,  comprising  twenty-seven  volumes  and  his 
opinions  pronounced  in  the  Supreme  Court,  filling  a  large 
measure  of  thirty-four  more,  administering  the  law  in  all  its 
branches,  civil  and  criminal  and  displaying  everywhere  a  mas 
tery  of  it.  He  thought  there  was  much  in  Judge  Story's  char 
acter  as  a  public  official  that  was  appreciated  by  those  who  saw 
his  work,  but  which  could  not  be  preserved, — his  courtesy,  his 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  155 

quickness  of  perception  and  his  promptness  in  the  dispatch  of 
business.  His  mind  seemed  to  grasp  at  once  the  controlling 
questions  in  a  case  and  thus  often  to  anticipate  the  slower  move 
ments  of  the  attorneys.  And  when  he  came  to  decide  he  was 
careful  to  assign  reasons  for  each  position  he  took,  so  as  to  make 
it  clear  that  it  was  not  the  judge,  but  the  law  that  disposed 
of  it, 

Sumner  recalled  the  fact  that  as  a  legal  writer,  Lord  Camp 
bell  had  declared  in  the  course  of  a  debate,  in  the  English  House 
of  Lords,  that  Judge  Story  had  a  greater  reputation  "  than  any 
author  England  could  boast  since  the  days  of  Blackstone,"  and 
that  his  works  had  been  reviewed  with  praise  in  all  of  the 
countries  of  Great  Britain,  as  well  as  in  France  and  Germany. 
As  a  teacher  he  instanced  his  exquisite  faculty  of  interesting 
the  young  and  winning  their  affections,  that  he  had  often  seen 
him  surrounded  by  a  group  of  them,  all  intent  upon  his  earnest 
conversation  and  freely  interrogating  him  on  matters  of  in 
terest;  in  the  lecture-room  he  was  overflowing  with  learning 
and  unrelaxing  in  effort,  yet  patient  and  gentle.  He  had  grown 
to  be  a  living  example  of  love  for  the  law,  which  seemed  to 
grow  warmer  with  his  accumulating  years.  As  evidence  of  his 
success  he  mentioned  the  fact  that  larger  classes  of  law  students 
were  gathered  to  his  classes  in  Harvard  than  to  any  other 
similar  school  in  England  or  America. 

Sumner  recalled  by  way  of  comparison  to  him  some  of  the 
great  lawyers  he  had  known  in  Europe,  Dupin  and  Pardessus  of 
France ;  Thibaut,  "  with  flowing  silvery  locks,  who  was  so  dear 
to  Germany  " ;  and  Savigny,  "  so  stately  in  person  and  peculiar 
in  countenance  whom  all  the  continent  of  Europe  delights  to 
honor  "  ;  but,  he  added,  "  my  heart  and  my  judgment,  un 
trammelled,  fondly  turn  with  new  love  and  admiration  to  my 
Cambridge  teacher  and  friend.  Jurisprudence  has  many  arrows 
in  her  quiver,  but  where  is  one  to  compare  with  that  which  is 
now  spent  in  the  earth  ?  " 

The  influence  of  Judge  Story  upon  Sumner's  character  can 
hardly  be  over-estimated.  It  was  of  incalculable  benefit,  for 
him,  to  have  daily  in  example  and  in  intimate  association  a  man 
of  Judge  Story's  pure  life  and  large  attainments  and  wonderful 
industry;  with  the  aid  of  his  advice  and  direction.  Take  as 
an  instance  of  this  training  the  beautiful  truth  he  inculcated, 
referred  to  by  Sumner  as  a  reminiscence  of  his  college  days, 
that  "  JSTo  man  stands  in  the  way  of  another,"  that  the  world 
is  so  broad  and  its  opportunities  so  numerous,  that  no  one's  suc 
cess  need  interfere  with  any  one  else's.  How  much  of  an  an 
tidote  to  bickering  and  jealousy  there  is  in  it !  It  may  not  have 


156  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

been  altogether  to  the  earnestness  with  which  Judge  Story  en 
forced  this  lesson  upon  his  group  of  youthful  hearers,  that 
Sumner  owed  it,  but  it  is  certain  that  one  of  the  strongest  and 
most  lovable  traits  of  his  character  was  his  loyalty  to  his  friends 
and  the  earnestness  with  which  he  seconded  all  their  efforts  for 
advancement,  without  jealousy  and  without  envy,  and  with 
never  a  thought  disclosed  that  he  might  himself  be  crowded 
out.  This  is  a  single  illustration  of  what  this  association 
brought  to  Sumner.  What  the  rest  was  we  can  imagine. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

JUDGE   STORY'S   PROFESSORSHIP   NOT   SOUGHT — FIRST   SPEECH 

AGAINST   SLAVERY — AS    A    LYCEUM    LECTURER — ARTICLE   ON 

PICKERING PHI     BETA     KAPPA     ORATION PLACE     AS     AN 

ORATOR. 

THE  place,  which  Sumner  had  aspired  to  for  many  years, 
Judge  Story's  professorship  in  the  Law  School,  was  now  vacant. 
Sumner's  desire  for  it  had  been  more  than  a  passing  wish.  It 
had  been  a  guiding  motive  and  a  stimulant  in  his  studies  and 
a  cherished  ambition  of  his  life  to  fill  this  place  worthily  and 
from  it  with  voice  and  pen  exert  a  wide  influence  in  teaching 
and  systematizing  the  law.  In  this  ambition  he  had  been  en 
couraged  by  Judge  Story  and  also  by  Professor  Greenleaf.  But 
how  we  all  change  !  The  long  wished  for  place  remained  vacant 
a  year  and  yet  Sumner  did  not  apply  for  it.  He  frankly  admit 
ted  that  if  it  were  offered  him,  the  chances  were  that  he  would 
decline  it.  For  several  years  he  had  been  growing  away  from  it. 
He  had  become  interested  in  public  affairs  and  in  literature; 
and  those  things  were  giving  a  new  direction  to  his  life.  He 
now  wished  for  greater  independence  than  he  could  have  in  the 
service  of  conservative  Harvard ;  he  was  ambitious  for  a  wider 
fame  than  was  there  in  prospect. 

On  the  evening  of  November  4,  1845,  he  attended  a  meeting 
in  Faneuil  Hall,  called  to  devise  means  to  resist  the  admis 
sion  of  Texas  as  a  slave  state.  Sumner  prepared  the  reso 
lutions  that  were  adopted,  the  first  political  resolutions  he  ever 
prepared ;  and  he  supported  them  by  a  speech,  the  first  political 
speech  he  ever  delivered.  Texas  was  asking  admission  to  the 
Union  with  a  constitution,  prohibiting  her  Legislature  from 
passing  any  law  to  emancipate  the  slaves  or  to  abolish  her  slave 
trade  with  other  states.  The  resolutions  prepared  by  Sumner 
condemned  the  annexation  as  an  extension  of  slavery  involving 
the  free,  as  well  as  the  slave  states,  in  the  two  greatest  national 
crimes,  Slavery  and  War.  Copies  of  the  resolutions  were  sent 
to  every  Senator  and  Representative  in  Congress.  They  called 
upon  them  to  resist  the  consummation  of  the  movement  to  the 
utmost  at  every  stage.  The  President  of  the  meeting,  Charles 
Francis  Adams,  made  a  speech  on  taking  the  chair  and  he  was 
followed  by  John  G,  Palfrey,  Sumner,  Wendell  Phillips,  Henry 

157 


158  LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

B.  Stanton,  Hillard,  William  H.  Charming  and  William  Lloyd 
Garrison. 

In  this,  his  first  public  utterance  upon  the  question  of  slavery, 
Sumner's  opposition  to  it  is  pronounced.  He  declared  that 
the  horrors  of  the  "  middle  passage  "  when  Africans  stolen  and 
carried  by  sea  far  from  their  homes,  pressed  on  shipboard,  into 
spaces  of  smaller  dimensions  for  each,  than  a  coffin,  were  be 
lieved  to  be  of  less  deadly  consequence  than  those  attending  the 
wretched  coffles  driven  from  the  exhausted  Northern  Slave 
States  to  the  sugar  plantations  farther  South;  one  quarter 
part  were  said  often  to  perish  in  those  removals;  and  yet  it 
was  an  extension  of  the  coffle  system  that  was  proposed  in  the 
scheme  for  the  admission  of  Texas.  He  insisted  that  this 
should  be  considered  well,  the  inauguration  of  a  new  slave 
trade,  secured  by  constitutional  guaranties.  He  was  determined 
that  it  should  not  take  place  with  his  consent ;  but  on  the  con 
trary  should  meet  his  vigorous  opposition.  If  such  an  extension 
of  the  slave  trade  was  to  take  place  Massachusetts  should  wash 
her  hands  of  all  participation  in  the  guilt  of  it. 

He  warned  her  Representatives  that  they  must  not  yield  to 
dalliance  with  slavery.  The  seductive  influence  of  the  pro- 
slavery  atmosphere  of  Washington,  which  had  for  many  years 
been  diffused  by  the  statesmen  of  the  South,  was  well  known 
in  Boston.  This  was  to  be  resisted  and  only  men  who  could 
withstand  its  fatal  influence  should  be  sent  there. 

The  depth  of  Sumner's  feeling  upon  the  question  of  slavery 
is  shown  by  an  incident  which  occurred  about  this  time.  He 
had  been  invited  to  lecture  before  the  New  Bedford  Lyceum  and 
had  accepted,  but  before  the  date  fixed  for  his  lecture,  he 
learned  that  colored  persons  were  excluded  from  the  privileges 
of  the  course.  He  at  once  wrote  a  letter  to  the  committee  de 
clining  the  appointment.  It  seemed  to  him,  to  found  such  a 
discrimination  on  difference  of  complexion,  was  contrary  to  the 
divine  injunction,  "  Do  unto  others  as  you  would  have  them  do 
unto  you."  He  closed  his  letter  to  the  committee  with  these 
words :  "  In  lecturing  before  a  Lyceum  which  has  introduced  the 
prejudice  of  color  among  its  laws,  and  thus  formally  reversed 
an  injunction  of  highest  morals  and  politics,  I  might  seem  to 
sanction  what  is  most  alien  to  my  soul  and  join  in  disobedience 
to  the  command  which  teaches  that  the  children  of  earth  are  all 
of  one  blood.  I  cannot  do  this."  Shortly  after,  the  obnoxious 
rule  was  rescinded,  and  Sumner  then  delivered  his  lecture. 

The  lecture  lyceum  played  an  important  part  in  Sumner's 
career.  It  was  a  means  of  entertainment  quite  common  in  Mas 
sachusetts.  A  society  would  be  organized  in  a  community  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  159 

a  committee  would  be  thus  appointed  to  secure  a  course  of 
lectures  for  a  winter  season.  The  lecturers  were  paid,  the 
money  to  defray  the  expense  being  raised  by  charging  an  ad 
mission.  The  fame  of  Sumner's  oration  on  The  True  Grandeur 
of  Nations,  distributed  by  the  friends  of  peace  to  the  news 
papers  and  noticed  and  portions  of  it  published  by  many  of 
them,  had  carried  his  name  abroad  and  created  a  general  desire 
to  see  and  hear  him.  To  the  work  of  preparation  for  these 
lectures,  both  in  matter  and  delivery,  he  brought  his  usual 
thoroughness,  carefully  writing  and  re-writing  and  amending 
them  and  practising  their  delivery,  before  they  were  presented 
to  the  audience.  His  earnest  and  easy  style  of  speaking  and  his 
attractive  personal  appearance,  as  well  as  the  freshness  of  the 
matter  and  interest  of  the  subjects  chosen  for  his  lectures,  made 
him  a  popular  lecturer. 

During  the  four  years,  from  1846  to  1850,  he  filled  many  ap 
pointments  of  this  kind,  speaking  in  almost  every  part  of  the 
State.  The  lyceums  were  frequently  connected  with  churches 
and  had  a  membership  composed  of  educated  Christian  people, 
with  a  bent  for  moral  and  intellectual  reforms,  but  not  bound 
together  by  any  political  tie.  These  audiences  were  peculiarly 
susceptible  to  such  reforms,  as  the  abolition  of  slavery  and  war, 
in  which  he  was  interested.  His  lectures  gave  him  a  large  ac 
quaintance  over  the  State,  with  this  class  of  people  and  was  the 
origin  of  that  strong  hold  which  he  acquired  and  retained  over 
them  as  long  as  he  lived. 

His  subjects  were  "  The  Employment  of  Time  "  and  "  White 
Slavery  in  the  Barbary  States  "  ;  the  former  lecture  was  deliv 
ered  for  the  first  time  before  the  Boston  Lyceum  in  February, 
1846,  and  the  latter  before  the  Boston  Mercantile  Library 
Association,  a  year  later;  both  were  delivered  many  times 
afterward  and  were  never  entirely  laid  aside  until  his  election 
to  the  Senate.  For  this  event,  they  aided  materially  in  paving 
the  way. 

The  former  lecture  was  an  earnest  effort  to  teach  the  young 
the  value  of  time  and  the  importance  of  a  just  distribution  of 
it  between  labor,  self-improvement  and  rest.  He  draws  the 
lessons  of  it  largely  from  the  lives  of  Franklin,  Gibbon,  Cob- 
bett  and  Scott,  holding  them  up  in  succession  as  examples  of 
what  can  be  accomplished  by  men,  in  moderate  circumstances, 
or  even  in  poverty,  by  the  judicious  and  industrious  husbandry 
of  time. 

"  Time,"  he  said,  "  is  the  measure  of  life  on  earth.  ...  Its 
divisions,  its  days,  its  hours,  its  minutes,  are  fractions  of  this 
heavenly  gift.  Every  moment  that  flies  over  our  heads  takes 


160  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

from  the  future  and  gives  to  the  irrevocable  past,  shortening  by 
so  much  the  measure  of  our  days,  abridging  by  so  much  the 
means  of  usefulness  committed  to  our  hands.  .  .  .  Waste  or 
sacrifice  of  time  is,  then,  waste  or  sacrifice  of  life  itself;  it  is 
partial  suicide/' 

He  computed  that  the  loss  of  one  single  hour  each  day  for  a 
year  amounts  at  its  end  to  thirty-six  working  days,  allowing 
ten  hours  to  the  day, — sufficient  when  applied  to  the  study  of  a 
new  language  or  an  unexplored  field  of  history  to  make  an  im 
portant  acquisition  in  the  accumulation  of  knowledge.  He  in 
stanced  a  French  jurist  who  had  composed  a  learned  and  im 
portant  work  "  in  the  quarter  hours  that  draggled  between 
dinner  ordered  and  dinner  served  ". 

He  gave  curious  examples  of  the  division  of  their  time  made 
by  numerous  men,  well-known  to  fame:  Lord  Coke,  six  hours 
for  sleep,  six  to  the  study  of  law,  four  to  prayer,  the  rest  to 
Nature ;  Sir  William  Jones,  six  to  law,  seven  to  slumber,  ten  to 
the  world  and  all  to  Heaven.  He  instanced  Napoleon  and 
Alexander  Von  Humboldt  as  only  allowing  four  hours,  out  of 
the  twenty-four,  to  sleep;  while  Judge  Story,  given  as  a  high 
example  of  what  may  be  wrought  by  wakeful  diligence,  who 
had  accomplished  more  than  any  one  within  the  circle  of  his 
individual  observation,  retired  always  at  ten  o'clock,  to  rise  at 
seven,  allowing  nine  hours  for  sleep.  It  would  have  been  in 
teresting  for  us  to  have  had  Sumner's  judgment  upon  the  whole 
matter,  but  this  he  discreetly  withheld,  contenting  himself  by 
saying  that  different  constitutions  require  different  amounts  of 
sleep,  even  the  same  individual  in  youth  and  old  age  requiring 
more  than  when  in  middle  life. 

An  occasional  passage  of  this  lecture  gives  us  an  insight  into 
Sumner's  own  habits  and  opinions.  In  speaking  of  the  time 
when  literary  men  have  done  their  best  work  he  says  it  may 
be  doubted  if  the  student  can  be  weaned  from  those  habits 
which  lead  him  to  continue  his  work  far  into  the  night,  so  that 
from  time  immemorial  he  has  been  said  to  "  consume  the  mid 
night  oil "  and  his  productions  marked  by  peculiar  care  to 
"  smell  of  the  lamp."  And  he  adds :  "  They  who  confess  them 
selves  among  the  slaves  of  the  lamp  say  that  there  is  an  ex 
citement  in  study,  increasing  as  the  work  proceeds,  which 
flames  forth  with  new  brightness  at  the  close  of  the  day  and  in 
the  stillness  of  those  hours  when  the  world  is  wrapped  in  sleep 
and  the  student  is  the  sole  watcher."  Sumner's  habit  of  work 
ing  late  in  the  night  had  already  been  formed  and  it  continued 
with  him  through  life. 

In  another  passage  he  warns  his  hearers  against  the  tendency 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER  161 

to  absorption  in  one  pursuit.  The  mere  man  of  business,  he 
insists,  is  "  a  man  of  one  idea  ",  which  has  its  root  in  no  gener 
ous  or  humane  desires,  but  in  selfishness.  He  lives  for  himself 
alone,  and  though  he  may  send  his  freight  to  the  farthest  quar 
ters  of  earth,  his  real  horizon  is  restricted  to  the  narrow  circle 
of  his  own  personal  interests.  He  would  not,  he  added,  weaken 
the  just  attachment  to  the  business  of  one's  choice,  but  he  re 
called  the  advice  of  Goethe  to  every  one,  to  read  daily  a  short 
poem  and,  in  this  spirit,  he  would  refine  and  elevate  business 
by  enlarging  the  intelligence,  widening  the  observation  and 
awakening  new  sympathies.  He  points  his  argument  with  the 
examples  of  Ben  Jonson,  working  as  a  bricklayer,  with  a  trowel 
in  his  hand  and  a  book  in  his  pocket,  of  Burns,  "  wooing  his 
muse  as  he  followed  his  plough  on  the  mountain-side  "  and  of 
Franklin  beginning  those  studies  which  made  him  immortal 
while  a  toiling  printer's  boy,  straitened  by  small  means. 

Summer's  lecture  upon  White  Slavery  in  the  Barbary  States 
was  first  delivered  before  the  Boston  Mercantile  Library  Asso 
ciation  on  February  17,  1847,  and  was  afterwards  given  before 
many  other  lyceums  of  the  State.  It  was  a  carefully  prepared 
monogram  on  the  origin,  history  and  character  of  slavery  as  it 
existed  in  the  States  of  Northern  Africa.  In  the  sensitive  state 
of  the  public  mind  upon  the  question  of  slavery  in  the  United 
States,  it  would  have  been  suicidal  for  a  lyceum  lecturer  to  at 
tempt  to  discuss  this  subject  before  an  audience.  He  would 
have  encountered  the  prejudice  of  a  large  class  of  his  patrons. 
Sumner  sought  to  evade  this  and  yet  teach  an  instructive  lesson 
upon  a  subject  in  which  he  had  become  interested,  by  laying  the 
scene  of  his  lecture  in  Africa  instead  of  America.  He  was 
better  enabled  to  bring  the  enormities  of  slavery  home  to  his 
audience  by  this  example,  because  the  people  of  the  Barbary 
States  were  black,  while  their  slaves  were  white  people  who  had 
been  the  unhappy  victims  of  piratical  excursions.  The  prey  of 
Barbary  seamen  was  often  vessels  upon  voyages  to  and  from 
America;  and  our  own  countrymen  were  thus  frequently  en 
slaved. 

The  United  States  government  repeatedly  paid  large  sums 
for  the  ransom  of  its  citizens.  But  the  pirates  continued  to  in 
crease  and  finally  became  so  much  of  an  annoyance  to  our 
commerce  that  war  was  declared  and  in  a  short  naval  campaign, 
distinguished  by  the  victories  of  Decatur  and  Bainbridge,  a 
treaty  was  extorted  from  the  Dey  of  Algiers,  stipulating  that 
henceforth  no  Americans  should  be  made  slaves.  But  the 
distinction  of  abolishing  slavery  there,  was  reserved  for  an 
English  Admiral,  Lord  Exmouth. 


162  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

In  1846,  John  Pickering,  one  of  Simmer's  friends,  died.  His 
father  was  the  Secretary  of  State  in  the  Cabinet  of  President 
Washington  at  the  time  of  the  son's  graduation  from  Harvard, 
in  1796.  The  next  year  the  son,  through  his  father's  influence 
was  made  Secretary  of  Legation  to  Portugal,  where  he  remained 
two  years,  and  then  for  two  more  he  was  private  secretary  to 
Mr.  King,  our  Minister  to  England,  with  his  residence  in 
London.  Upon  his  return  to  Massachusetts  he  read  law  with 
Hon.  Samuel  Putnam,  at  Salem,  afterwards  a  judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  State,  who  was  also  the  legal  preceptor 
of  Judge  Story.  Pickering  was  three  times  a  Representative 
and  as  often  a  Senator  in  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  and 
was  for  sixteen  years  the  City  Solicitor  of  Boston,  besides  filling 
the  vacancy,  on  the  commission  to  revise  the  statutes,  caused 
by  the  death  of  Professor  Putnam.  He  was  a  frequent  con 
tributor  to  the  American  Jurist  and  the  Law  Reporter. 

But  this  was  only  one  side  of  the  life  of  this  laborious  man. 
Along  with  his  legal  pursuits,  by  a  careful  husbandry  of  his 
time,  he  pursued  the  study  of  philology  and  became  the  master 
of  nine  different  languages,  five  of  which  he  spoke.  He  studied 
the  Indian  languages  of  North  America  and  devised  an  alpha 
bet  for  them.  But  his  best  known  work  was  his  Greek-English 
Lexicon,  still  the  standard  in  use  in  American  colleges.  He 
was  elected  Professor  of  Hebrew  and  other  Oriental  languages 
and  later  to  the  chair  of  Greek  Literature  in  Harvard.  But  he 
declined  both.  His  name  was  twice  proposed  in  the  public 
prints  for  President  of  the  University.  But  he  continued  to 
the  last,  a  modest,  hard-working  lawyer. 

Although  he  was  many  years  Sumner's  senior,  kindred  tastes 
as  well  as  the  common  experiences  of  foreign  travel  had  made 
them  friends.  Upon  Pickering's  death,  Sumner  commemorated 
him  in  a  carefully  prepared  article,  published  in  the  Law 
Reporter  of  June,  1846.  It  is  one  of  the  best  sketches  of 
its  kind  he  ever  produced.  He  enforced  again  by  the  example 
of  Pickering,  the  two  thoughts  he  had  kept  uppermost  in  his 
lecture  on  the  Employment  of  Time,  the  importance  of  the 
careful  husbandry  of  the  passing  moments  of  life  and  the  neces 
sity  of  avoiding  the  absolute  absorption  of  one's  self  in  the 
single  business  of  his  choice.  Sumner  showed  that  Pickering 
was  a  painstaking,  laborious  attorney,  absorbed  in  the  business 
of  his  office,  during  the  working  hours  of  the  day,  and  arose  to  a 
high  rank  at  the  bar;  but  he  emphasized  how  much  he  was 
able  to  accomplish  for  humanity  and  his  own  fame  by  the  oc 
cupation  of  his  hours  of  leisure  in  useful  studies. 

Sumner    commemorated    Pickering    on    another    occasion. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  163 

When  he  was  invited  to  deliver  the  address  on  the  anniversary 
of  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa  Society  of  Harvard  University  in 
August,  1846,  he  made  it  the  occasion  of  his  oration  on  The 
Scholar,  the  Jurist,  the  Artist,  and  the  Philanthropist,  com 
memorating  under  these  heads  his  former  friends,  Pickering, 
Story,  Washington  Allston  and  William  Ellery  Channing. 
They  had  all  been  members  of  the  Phi 'Beta  Kappa  Fraternity 
and  graduates  of  Harvard.  It  was  customary  to  issue  a  cata 
logue  of  the  Fraternity  every  four  years,  marking  with  a  star 
the  names  of  those  members  who  had  died.  These  names  were 
all  so  starred  in  the  catalogue  of  the  year. 

The  audience  before  which  the  oration  was  delivered  was  a 
brilliant  one.  The  First  Church  of  Cambridge  was  filled  with 
the  culture  and  beauty  of  the  old  university  town  and  its 
friends.  Edward  Everett,  the  graceful  and  impressive  orator, 
then  just  returned  from  his  mission  to  the  Court  of  St.  James, 
was  present  to  assume  his  duties  as  President  of  Harvard,  and 
the  retiring  President,  Josiah  Quincy,  was  there,  now  laying 
aside  the  robes  of  office,  after  years  of  distinguished  service  in 
the  National  House  of  Kepresentatives,  in  the  Mayoralty  of 
Boston  and  at  the  head  of  his  Alma  Mater.  The  venerable  John 
Quincy  Adams  was  there  to  grace  by  his  presence,  for  the  last 
time,  this  anniversary  of  his  college  fraternity,  and  William 
Kent,  the  newly  elected  successor  to  Judge  Story  in  the  Law 
School,  the  Governor  of  Virginia,  Congressmen,  poets  and  his 
torians.  And  those  nearer  to  Sumner  were  there,  Longfellow, 
Prescott,  Howe  and  his  accomplished  wife,  who,  "  for  the  first 
quarter  of  an  hour  did  not  dare  to  look  at  him,  dreading  mistake 
or  failure  and  who  was  then  completely  surprised  and  carried 
away,  who  had  no  idea  he  could  do  anything  like  it."  Perhaps 
a  sight  of  her  and  a  touch  of  his  old  admiration  reached  Sumner. 
There  too  was  his  mother  and  sister  to  witness  his  triumph. 

He  was  dressed  with  his  usual  care:  He  had  been  too  much 
under  the  influence  of  Daniel  Webster  not  to  appreciate  the 
value  of  this.  And  his  handsome  figure  never  appeared  to 
better  advantage.  He  spoke  for  two  hours,  easily  and  forcibly, 
without  the  aid  of  notes  or  manuscript,  apparently  all  thought 
of  himself  lost  in  his  interest  in  his  theme.  Once  he  turned 
to  address  the  President  of  the  University  and  seemed  to  forget 
his  audience  and  for  some  minutes  with  his  back  to  them  con 
tinued  speaking  to  him  alone.  But  his  delivery  was  so  effective 
that  fifty  years  afterwards  persons  still  living  could  recall 
distinctly  certain  passages  and  the  peculiar  emphasis  he  gave 
them.  It  is  considered  by  some  his  greatest  oratorical  triumph. 
The  production  excels  any  of  his  others  in  style  and  finish,  and 


164  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

the  subject  being  of  permanent  interest  it  will  probably  con 
tinue  to  be  one  of  the  most  popular  of  his  orations.  In  the 
edition  of  his  works  he  prefaced  it  with  this  sentiment  from 
Schiller ;  "  Give  the  world  beneath  your  influence  a  direction 
towards  the  good,  and  the  tranquil  rhythm  of  time  will  bring 
its  development/' 

As  the  title  of  his  oration  was  The  Scholar,  the  Jurist,  the 
Artist,  the  Philanthropist,  so  his  theme  was  Knowledge,  Jus 
tice,  Beauty,  Lqve,  "the  comprehensive  attributes  of  God,"  as 
he  declared ;  and  he  used  the  lives  of  his  four  friends  as  threads 
on  which  to  string  a  discussion  of  these  subjects.  His  aim  was 
not  so  much  to  commemorate  the  men  as  to  advance  the  objects 
they  had  so  successfully  served.  Speaking  of  Pickering,  he 
paid  this  tribute  to  the  uses  and  the  graces  of  scholarship: 

"  He  knew  that  scholarship  of  all  kinds  would  gild  the  life 
of  its  possessor,  enlarge  the  resources  of  the  bar,  enrich  the  voice 
of  the  pulpit,  and  strengthen  the  learning  of  medicine.  He 
knew  that  it  would  afford  a  soothing  companionship  in  hours  of 
relaxation  from  labor,  in  periods  of  sadness,  and  in  the  evening 
of  life;  that  when  once  embraced,  it  was  more  constant  than 
friendship, — attending  its  votary,  as  an  invisible  spirit,  in  the 
toils  of  the  day,  the  watches  of  the  night,  the  changes  of  travel 
and  the  alternations  of  fortune  or  health/' 

In  speaking  of  Story's  love  for  literature  and  the  fact  that  he 
would  frequently  turn  aside  from  the  sterner  studies  of  the  law 
to  cultivate  the  love  of  poetry  and  polite  letters,  he  likened 
him,  in  this,  to  Seldon,  Somers,  Mansfield  and  Blackstone  in 
England,  and  L'Hopital  and  D'Aguesseau  in  France,  and  he 
ventured  the  assertion  that  it  would  not  be  easy  to  mention  a 
single  person  winning  the  highest  place  in  the  profession  of 
the  law,  who  was  not  a  scholar  also. 

In  this  address  he  fixed  for  us  his  definition  of  the  term, 
Jurist.  It  is  interesting  to  us  because  we  know  that  during 
many  of  the  years  of  his  early  manhood  it  was  Sumner's  am 
bition  to  be  one.  He  described  him  as  a  "student  and  ex 
pounder  of  jurisprudence  as  a  science, — not  merely  lawyer  or 
judge,  pursuing  it  as  an  art" — who  examines  every  principle 
in  the  light  of  science,  and,  while  doing  justice,  seeks  to  widen 
and  confirm  the  means  of  justice  hereafter  by  reducing  his  pro 
fession  to  an  exact  science, — such  men  as  Grotius,  Pothier, 
Coke  and  Kent,  expounders  of  the  law  and  therefore  higher 
than  lawyers  and  not  to  be  confounded  with  such  men  as  Dun 
ning,  and  Pinkney,  mere  practitioners,  though  the  one  be 
the  acknowledged  leader  of  Westminster  Hall  and  the  other  of 
the  American  Bar. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  165 

In  his  treatment  of  the  part  of  his  subject  devoted  to  Wash 
ington  Allston,  the  artist,  Sumner's  love  of  the  beautiful  in 
life  and  in  art  becomes  easily  apparent.  It  is  not  often  in  a 
young  man  that  this  trait  comes  out  in  such  marked  degree. 
And  it  shows  how  unerringly  Sumner's  attention  had  already 
been  fixed  on  the  pure  and  the  good  and  how  earnestly  he  looked 
forward  to  the  enlargement  of  their  influence. 

"  Allston,"  he  said,  "  was  a  good  man,  with  a  soul  refined  by 
purity,  exalted  by  religion,  softened  by  love.  In  manner  he  was 
simple,  yet  courtly, — quiet,  though  anxious  to  please, — kindly 
to  all  alike,  the  poor  and  the  lowly  not  less  than  the  rich  and 
great.  As  he  spoke  in  that  voice  of  gentlest  utterance,  all  were 
charmed  to  listen;  and  the  airy-footed  hours  often  tripped  on 
far  toward  the  gates  of  morning,  before  his  friends  could  break 
from  his  spell.  His  character  is  transfigured  in  his  works  .  .  . 
Allston  was  a  Christian  artist;  and  the  beauty  of  expression 
lends  uncommon  charm  to  his  colors.  All  that  he  did  shows 
purity,  sensibility,  refinement,  delicacy,  feeling  rather  than 
force.  His  genius  was  almost  feminine.  As  he  advanced  in 
years,  this  was  more  remarked.  His  pictures  became  more  and 
more  instinct  with  those  sentiments  which  form  the  true  glory 
of  Art.  .  .  .  He  looked  down  on  the  common  strife  for 
worldly  consideration.  With  impressive  beauty  of  truth  and  ex 
pression  he  said,  Fame  is  the  eternal  shadow  of  excellence, 
from  which  it  can  never  be  separated/  Here  is  a  volume, 
prompting  to  noble  thoughts  and  action,  not  for  the  sake  of 
glory,  but  for  advance  in  knowledge,  virtue,  excellence." 

It  was,  however,  in  Channing  that  Sumner  found  the  master 
spirit  that  had  exerted  most  influence  in  shaping  his  own 
thoughts  of  reform.  We  have  already  seen  in  his  oration  on 
The  True  Grandeur  of  Nations  how  firmly  he  had  set  his  face 
against  war  and  slavery.  This  was  largely  an  inheritance  from 
Channing,  who  though  a  minister,  serving  a  Boston  congrega 
tion,  had  given  much  time  to  these  subjects  and  seems  to  have 
had  a  peculiar  attraction  for  young  men.  In  the  mention  of 
him,  which  Sumner  reserved  to  the  last  in  his  oration,  although 
his  death  had  been  the  first  of  the  four,  an  opportunity  was 
presented  for  a  renewed  discussion  of  the  inhumanity  of  war 
and  slavery.  Sumner  did  not  let  it  go  unheeded. 

In  recalling  with  what  earnestness  Channing  had  discussed 
them  and  with  what  success,  Sumner  was  led  to  speak  of  the 
style  of  his  oratory.  What  he  said  has  already  been  quoted  in 
these  pages  as  showing  the  models  upon  which  he  formed  his 
own  ideal  of  an  orator. 

In  the  contemplation  of  such  exemplars  well  might  Sumner 


1G6  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

exclaim  in  closing  his  oration :  "  In  their  presence,  how  truly  do 
we  feel  the  insignificance  of  office  and  wealth,  which  men  so 
hotly  pursue !  What  is  office  ?  and  what  is  wealth  ?  Expres 
sions  and  representatives  of  what  is  present  and  fleeting  only, 
investing  the  possessor  with  a  brief  and  local  regard.  Let  this 
not  be  exaggerated ;  it  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  serene 
fame  which  is  the  reflection  of  generous  labors  in  great  causes. 
The  street  lights  within  the  circle  of  their  nightly  glimmer, 
seem  to  outshine  the  distant  stars,  observed  of  men  in  all  lands 
and  times,  but  gas-lamps  are  not  to  be  mistaken  for  celestial 
luminaries.  They  who  live  for  wealth,  and  the  things  of  this 
world,  follow  shadows,  neglecting  realities  eternal  on  earth  and 
in  heaven.  After  the  perturbations  of  life,  all  its  accumulated 
possessions  must  be  resigned,  except  those  only  which  have  been 
devoted  to  God  and  mankind.  What  we  do  for  ourselves 
perishes  with  this  mortal  dust;  what  we  do  for  others  lives 
coeval  with  the  benefaction.  Worms  may  destroy  the  body,  but 
they  cannot  consume  such  a  fame." 

The  success  of  the  oration  was  instantaneous.  At  the  dinner 
of  the  Society  held  after  the  exercises  in  the  church,  John 
Quincy  Adams  offered  the  toast :  "  The  memory  of  the  Scholar, 
the  Jurist,  the  Artist,  the  Philanthropist ;  and  not  the  memory, 
the  long  life  of  the  kindred  spirit  who  has  this  day  embalmed 
them  all."  And  in  a  letter  dated  two  days  later,  after  con 
gratulating  Sumner  on  his  oration,  he  wrote :  "  Casting  my 
eyes  backward  no  farther  than  the  4th  of  July  of  last  year, 
when  you  set  all  the  vipers  of  Alecto  a-hissing  by  proclaiming 
the  Christian  law  of  universal  peace  and  love,  and  then  casting 
them  forward,  perhaps  not  much  farther,  but  beyond  my  own 
allotted  time,  I  see  you  have  a  mission  to  perform.  I  look  from 
Pisgah  to  the  Promised  Land ;  you  must  enter  upon  it."  The 
old  anti-slavery  warrior  doubtless  realized  that  in  Sumner  the 
cause  had  found  a  new  champion,  but  he  could  hardly  have 
realized  the  weight  of  the  blows  this  new  champion  was  destined 
to  deal  his  ancient  enemy  on  the  floor  of  Congress. 

Edward  Everett  wrote  Sumner :  "  Should  you  never  do  any 
thing  else,  you  have  done  enough  for  fame ;  but  you  are,  as  far 
as  these  public  efforts  are  concerned,  at  the  commencement  of 
a  career  destined,  I  trust,  to  last  for  long  years,  of  ever  in 
creasing  usefulness  and  honor."  Chancellor  Kent,  to  whom  one 
of  the  pamphlet  copies  of  the  oration  was  sent,  pronounced  it 
one  of  the  most  splendid  productions,  in  point  of  diction  and 
eloquence,  he  had  ever  read.  This  was  high  praise,  from  high 
authority.  It  was  appreciated  by  Sumner.  He  valued  the 
friendship  of  these  men.  His  transparent  nature  made  him 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  167 

ever  ready  to  accord  just  praise  to  others  and  to  value  theirs  of 
himself  as  a  frank  acknowledgment  of  his  merit. 

Sumner's  place  in  Boston  as  a  public  orator  was  now  estab 
lished.  His  work  as  a  lyceum  lecturer  had  satisfied  his  au 
diences.  His  oration  on  The  True  Grandeur  of  Nations  had 
awakened  an  unusual  interest  in  him  and  attracted  general 
public  attention,  but  there  was  still  a  doubt  whether  it  was  not 
a  fortunate  effort  upon  a  favorite  subject  that  furnished  no  just 
estimate  of  the  man.  Even  taken  at  its  best,  this  oration  lacked 
the  smoothness  and  finish  of  the  "  The  Scholar,  the  Jurist,  the 
Artist,  and  the  Philanthropist."  The  standard,  at  Cambridge, 
where  the  influence  of  the  college  was  felt,  was  high  and  the 
audiences  critical  in  their  estimates  of  new  men,  but  Sumner 
had  fairly  satisfied  them.  However  much  in  the  future  they 
doubted  the  soundness  of  his  views  on  slavery  and  the  rights 
of  the  colored  race  they  did  not  afterwards  question  his  ability 
as  an  orator.  He  now  took  his  position  among  them  as  an  ac 
ceptable  speaker,  much  sought  for  on  public  occasions  and  a 
child  of  their  own,  in  whom  they  felt  a  just  pride. 

This  distinction  he  laboriously  earned.  At  this  time  of  his 
life  he  wrote  out  his  orations  in  full  before  delivery  and  after 
carefully  criticising  them  himself  and  receiving  suggestions 
from  friends,  he  memorized  them.  He  was  careful  of  details 
in  delivery  that  would  contribute  to  the  effect  of  an  address. 
In  the  absence  of  Longfellow  and  his  wife,  from  Cambridge, 
we  find  him  taking  advantage  of  the  retirement  of  their  house, 
to  memorize  and  practise  the  delivery  of  some  of  them.  He 
could  there  speak  aloud  without  being  heard.  He  followed  this 
manner  of  preparing  an  address  for  many  years, — even  after  he 
became  a  Senator  and  after  his  fame  was  established  in  Wash 
ington. 

He  was  equally  careful  in  the  revision  of  his  orations  for 
publication.  Felton  made  a  playful  reference  to  it,  when 
Sumner  was  revising  his  True  Grandeur  of  Nations  for  the 
press.  Owing  to  the  convenience  of  Felton's  house  to  the  Har 
vard  College  library,  where  he  wished  to  obtain  works  of  refer 
ence,  Sumner  used  a  room  there  as  a  convenient  place  to  work. 
Felton  wrote  to  Longfellow :  "  You  have  no  idea,  what  an 
arsenal  of  peace  my  house  has  become ;  Lives  of  William  Penn, 
sermons  on  war,  tracts  of  the  American  Peace  Society,  journals, 
anti-everything,  Scriptural  arguments,  estimates  of  the  cost  of 
navies  and  armies,  besides  a  great  many  smaller  arms,  the  pis 
tols,  hand  grenades,  cutlasses  and  so  forth  of  the  Peace  Es 
tablishment,  are  arranged  in  every  part  of  the  house,  upstairs, 
downstairs,  in  the  attics  and  in  the  cellars." 


168          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumner^s  diligence  in  revision  did  not  always  impress  people 
so  good-naturedly  as  it  had  Felton.  In  publishing  the  edition 
of  his  orations  and  addresses  in  1850,  he  made  so  many  changes, 
even  upon  the  third  proof,  that  his  printers  remonstrated  vigor 
ously  and  told  him  they  could  not  bear  the  extra  expense  and 
that  he  must  thereafter  finish  his  revision  before  handing  his 
manuscript  to  the  printer.  But  the  reproof  did  not  cure  the 
habit.  For  in  the  final  revision  of  his  works,  which  he  was 
making  at  the  time  of  his  death,  he  was  as  exacting  as  ever  and 
still  making  numerous  changes.  A  comparison  of  almost  any 
oration  in  this  with  the  same  one  in  the  earlier  editions  will 
illustrate  my  meaning.  The  changes,  I  think,  in  some  instances 
did  not  add  to  the  value  of  the  works.  They  sometimes  de 
tracted  from  their  freshness  and  made  them  appear  unnatural 
and  labored  to  those  at  least  who  had  known  them  in  their 
earlier  form.  But  the  great  idealist  was  still  to  the  last  reach 
ing  out  after  excellence  that  he  felt  as  constantly  eluding  his 
grasp. 


CHAPTER  XV 


PEACE INTERESTED  IN  THE  SUBJECT  OF  PRISON  DISCI 
PLINE — THE  BOSTON  PRISON  DISCIPLINE  SOCIETY — EQUAL 
RIGHTS  OF  COLORED  CHILDREN  IN  THE  PUBLIC  SCHOOLS — 
DIVERSIONS 

IN  1848,  a  friend  suggested  to  Sunnier  that  his  interest  in 
his  favorite  reforms  had  been  imputed  by  some  to  a  desire  for 
public  notice.  Sumner  felt  hurt  at  this  imputation.  He 
replied  at  some  length  explaining  the  real  origin  of  his  interest. 
The  explanation  is  interesting  as  a  matter  of  personal  history. 

His  attention  had  been  attracted  to  the  question  of  universal 
peace  by  an  oration  of  President  Quincy  delivered  in  old  South 
Church,  Boston,  when  he  was  scarcely  nine  years  of  age.  It 
was  at  a  meeting  of  the  American  Peace  Society.  The  lecture 
made  a  deep  impression  upon  the  youthful  mind  of  Sumner  by 
showing  the  appalling  waste  of  life  and  property  war  involved. 
While  in  the  reading  of  after  years  he  was  attracted  by  the 
glamour  of  military  glory,  the  good  seed  sowed  by  this  lecture 
seemed  never  to  have  been  choked  out.  Shortly  after  he  left 
college,  this  early  impression  was  deepened  by  a  lecture  of 
William  Ladd,  in  the  old  Cambridge  Court  House.  As  this  con 
viction  grew  upon  Sumner  and  the  notes  of  years  of  reading 
accumulated  in  support  of  it,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  express  in 
conversation  his  abhorrence  of  war.  As  an  illustration,  while  in 
Paris,  he  was  asked  by  M.  Victor  Foucher,  to  read  a  part  of  the 
manuscript  of  his  treatise  upon  the  law  of  nations.  Upon 
returning  it  with  his  criticisms,  Sumner  called  his  attention  to 
the  portion  of  his  work  that  placed  war  among  the  recognized 
arbitraments  for  the  determination  of  questions  between 
nations.  While  admitting  the  truth  of  this  position,  Sumner 
urged  him  to  combat  it  as  barbarous  and  unchristian. 

W'ithin  a  month  after  his  return  from  Europe,  Sumner  was 
attracted  by  a  notice  in  a  newspaper  of  a  meeting  of  the  Amer 
ican  Peace  Society  and  attended.  It  was  held  in  a  small  room 
under  Marlboro  Chapel,  with  scarcely  a  dozen  persons  present. 
Sumner  was  placed  upon  its  Executive  Committee  and  there 
after  became  one  of  its  active  members.  But  his  part  for  peace 
consisted  in  attendance  upon  its  meetings  and  work  upon  its 

169 


170          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

committees,  until  1845,  when  being  pressed  to  deliver  the  Muni 
cipal  Oration,  he  unburdened  his  mind  of  the  accumulation  of 
years  of  study  and  thought  upon  this  subject. 

It  could  hardly  be  expected  that  he  would  escape  criticism 
altogether,  after  this  bold  assault  upon  such  a  time-honored 
institution  as  war,  with  its  well  paid  armies  of  apologists.  He 
was  frequently  called  upon  to  defend  his  positions.  But  he 
did  it  as  fearlessly  as  he  had  announced  them.  His  public 
orations  that  followed,  as  the  one  on  "  The  Scholar,  the  Jurist, 
the  Artist,,  and  the  Philanthropist"  and  another,  on  "Fame 
and  Glory"  showed  that  his  conclusions  were  not  hastily 
formed  and  that  he  would  take  no  step  backward.  They  both 
reiterated  the  conclusions  expressed  in  his  Municipal  Oration. 
In  1849,  he  was  invited  to  address  the  American  Peace  Society 
at  its  annual  meeting  and  he  delivered  an  elaborate  oration. 
His  purpose  was  to  show  that  as  all  human  trials  of  right,  be 
tween  individuals,  by  mere  physical  prowess,  had  been  abolished 
so  war  ought  also  to  be  abolished,  in  the  settlement  of  disputes 
between  nations.  The  address  was  replete  with  learning  and 
abounded  in  historical  quotations  to  sustain  his  position;  but 
it  lacked  the  eloquence  and  the  exuberant  diction  of  the  others. 

In  the  fall  of  1849,  Sumner  was  appointed  chairman  of  a 
committee  to  secure  a  proper  representation  of  the  United 
States  at  a  Peace  Congress  to  be  held  in  1850  at  Frankfort-on- 
the-Main.  He  prepared  the  address  of  the  committee  to  the 
people  of  the  United  States,  urging  upon  them  systematic 
work  in  the  appointment  of  delegates  and  in  securing  some  con 
gressional  action  upon  the  subject.  The  address  was  also 
signed  by  the  secretaries  Elihu  Burritt  and  Amasa  Walker, 
Sumner  was  chosen  a  delegate  to  the  Congress  but  felt  con 
strained  by  lack  of  means  to  decline  the  place.  Public  interest 
in  the  subject  was,  however,  beginning  to  wane.  In  the  United 
States  it  was  soon  completely  overshadowed  by  the  slavery 
question  and  in  Europe  there  was  a  reaction  against  it. 

With  this  address,  Sumner's  public  work  in  the  cause  of 
universal  peace  may  be  said  to  have  ended.  His  election  to  the 
Senate  and  absorption  in  the  slavery  question,  with  the  other 
duties  of  his  office  withdrew  him  entirely  from  this  work.  But 
his  convictions  remained  unchanged  and  he  never  hesitated  to 
express  them  upon  proper  occasions.  One  of  the  provisions  of 
his  will  set  apart  a  fund  for  an  annual  prize  to  be  given  the 
student  of  Harvard  College  for  the  best  dissertation  on  uni 
versal  peace  and  the  methods  by  which  war  may  be  permanently 
superseded.  And  he  added  in  his  will,  after  this  provision,  these 
words :  "I  do  this  in  the  hope  of  drawing  the  attention  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  171 

students  to  the  practicability  of  organizing  peace  among  na 
tions,  which  I  sincerely  believe  may  be  done.  I  cannot  doubt 
that  the  same  modes  of  decision,  which  now  prevail  between 
individuals,  between  towns  and  between  smaller  communities 
may  be  extended  to  nations." 

But  it  seems  strange  that  any  one  would  consider  the  cause 
of  universal  peace  at  the  time  Sumner  was  engaged  in  it  a  fruit 
ful  field  for  gathering  fame.  The  little  meeting  under  Marlboro 
Chapel  of  a  few  enthusiastic  friends  of  humanity  almost 
objects  of  merriment  to  a  more  numerous,  though  perhaps  a 
less  thoughtful  public,  was  hardly  a  company  into  which  an 
ambitious  young  man,  bent  on  fame,  would  find  his  way.  The 
whole  story  of  Sumner's  connection  with  the  peace  question 
shows  how  utterly  without  foundation  such  an  imputation  was. 
Those  who  knew  Sumner,  his  sincerity  and  disinterestedness, 
with  his  crowning  wish  to  be  useful,  in  permanently  improving 
the  condition  of  his  fellow-men,  knew  how  unjust  it  was. 

Sumner  scouted  the  thought  that  it  was  done  for  any  purpose 
of  popularity.  "I  have  little  sympathy  with  office-seekers, — 
I  might  add  with  self-seekers,  in  any  way,"  he  wrote.  "  My 
own  fixed  purpose  has  always  been  to  lead  a  life  without  office. 
This  has  been  a  cherished  idea.  I  would  teach,  if  I  might  so 
aspire,  by  example,  that  a  useful  and  respectable  career  may  be 
spent  without  dependence  upon  popular  favor  and  without  the 
possession  of  what  you  have  called  '  power.' "  And  then,  as  if 
reminded  that  it  was  his  own  motives,  that  were  assailed,  he 
continued :  "  In  the  expression  of  my  opinions  I  have  hoped 
to  show  a  proper  regard  for  those  from  whom  I  differ.  Well 
aware  that  where  freedom  of  thought  exists,  difference  must 
ensue,  I  have  always  desired  that  these  should  be  tempered 
by  mutual  kindness  and  forbearance  so  that  we  might  all  at 
least  f  agree  to  disagree.'  In  this  spirit  while  leaving  others  to 
determine  their  course  towards  me,  I  have  endeavored,  on  my 
part  to  allow  no  debates  of  opinion  to  interfere  with  any 
pleasant  personal  relations ;  and  though  sometimes  condemning 
or  criticising  the  public  conduct  of  men,  I  trust  that  I  have 
never  failed  to  do  homage  to  their  unquestioned  virtues." 

Sumner's  interest  in  the  subject  of  prison  discipline,  a  sub 
ject  considerably  more  discussed  then  than  now,  was  not  alto 
gether  of  his  choosing.  His  friend  Howe  had  urged  it  upon 
him.  Howe  had  made  a  study  of  the  subject,  which  was  being 
agitated  by  Prison  Discipline  Societies  in  nearly  all  the  large 
cities  of  the  United  States  and  Europe,  and  he  was  a  convert 
to  what  is  known  as  the  Pennsylvania  system,  which  enforced 
the  entire  separation  of  the  prisoners  from  one  another,  as 


172  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

contradistinguished  from  the  Auburn  system  which  required 
them  to  labor  together  during  the  day,  only  separating  them 
at  night.  The  Boston  Prison  Discipline  Society  was  holding  its 
annual  meeting,  during  the  last  week  of  May.  Its  President 
was  Dr.  Francis  Wayland,  its  Secretary  Rev.  Louis  Dwight  and 
its  Treasurer,  Samuel  A.  Eliot.  Dr.  Wayland  was  an  excellent 
man,  but  being  absorbed  in  his  duties  as  President  of  Brown 
University,  gave  little  attention  to  the  society.  Mr.  Eliot  was 
a  merchant,  the  Treasurer  of  Harvard  College,  but  knew  little 
of  the  subject  of  prison  discipline,  had  no  training  as  a  public 
speaker,  and  little  taste  for  controversy.  But  he  was  thor 
oughly  loyal  to  Dwight,  the  only  paid  officer  of  the  society,  a 
man  of  limited  ability  and  rather  slow  of  comprehension,  nar 
row  and  opinionated,  who  had  been  educated  for  the  ministry, 
but  devoted  his  time  to  this  work,  kept  the  office,  solicited  con 
tributions  to  it  and  prepared  its  annual  reports.  In  fact 
Dwight  was  the  Society.  He  was  a  firm  believer  in  the  Auburn 
system.  In  his  annual  reports,  he  had  pretty  uniformly  aired 
his  views,  treating  the  Pennsylvania  system  and  its  separation 
of  the  prisoners,  in  the  main,  rather  unfairly. 

Howe  had  noticed  this  and  called  Sumner's  attention  to  it. 
By  an  arrangement  he  and  Sumner  attended  the  annual  meet 
ing  of  the  society  held  in  1845  in  Park  Street  Church  and  de 
termined  that,  if  the  Secretary  pursued  his  usual  course,  they 
would  publicly  remonstrate.  The  customary  report  of  the 
Secretary  was  read,  with  its  customary  strictures  on  the  Penn 
sylvania  system,  and  according  to  previous  arrangement,  the 
motion  had  been  made  to  adopt  it,  when  Sumner,  seated  two 
or  three  pews  to  the  left  of  the  platform  mounted  the  rail  of 
his  pew,  passed  quickly  over  the  backs  of  the  intervening  ones 
till  he  stood  in  front  of  the  President,  with  a  bundle  of  papers 
in  his  hand.  Hardly  addressing  the  President,  who  did  not 
seem  to  know  who  he  was,  Sumner  proceeded  without  ceremony 
to  tear  the  views  of  the  Secretary  to  pieces.  For  full  half  an 
hour,  to  the  annoyance  of  the  Secretary  and  the  surprise  of  the 
audience  at  this  unexpected  breach  in  the  customary  routine 
of  the  programme,  Sumner  poured  forth  an  accumulation  of 
facts  and  figures  to  disprove  the  Secretary's  position,  and  show 
his  want  of  fairness.  The  Secretary,  in  his  dull,  inconclusive 
way,  undertook  to  reply,  but  the  audience  was  with  Sumner  and 
compelled  a  reference  of  the  report  to  a  committee  to  revise  and 
modify  it,  with  power  to  visit  Philadelphia,  in  the  name  of  the 
Society  and  ascertain  on  the  spot  the  true  character  of  the  sys 
tem  Dwight  had  condemned. 

Howe,    Sumner,    Eliot,    Horace   Mann,    Walter    Channing, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  173 

Dwight,  George  T.  Bigelow  and  J.  W.  Edmonds  were  appointed 
as  the  committee.  Howe,  Sumner,  Eliot  and  Dwight  visited 
Philadelphia  and  examined  the  prison  on  three  successive  days. 
Dwight  was  sullen  and  silent,  taking  little  interest  in  what  he 
saw,  while  Sumner  was  alert,  prying  into  everything,  bent  on 
knowing  about  the  prison  and  its  workings  and  the  results. 
He  plied  the  directors  with  questions  and  finally  took  Dwight 
to  task  before  them  for  having  misrepresented  some  of  the 
facts.  Howe  prepared  the  report  of  the  committee  and  he  and 
Sumner  sought  to  have  it  embodied  in  the  report  of  the  Society 
for  the  following  year;  but  Dwight  was  strong  enough  to  pre 
vent  this. 

The  following  January,  Sumner  published  an  article  in  the 
Christian  Examiner,  setting  forth  the  merits  of  the  separate 
system.  Boston  was  about  to  build  a  new  jail  and  he  was  anx 
ious  that  she  should  show  the  same  superiority  in  her  prisons 
that  she  did  in  her  schools  and  colleges.  And  he  was  especially 
anxious  to  correct  .the  erroneous  impressions,  about  the  Penn 
sylvania  system,  created  by  Dwight's  reports.  Another  anni 
versary  of  the  Prison  Discipline  Society  was  approaching  and 
he  and  Howe  were  determined  to  down  Dwight.  The  article 
opens  with  a  tribute  to  Miss  Dix,  who  was  devoting  her  life 
unselfishly  to  the  visitation  of  the  charitable  and  penal  insti 
tutions  of  the  Northern  and  Middle  States,  and  it  did  not  close 
without  a  notice  of  Dwight  who,  he  insisted,  had  never  failed  to 
present  all  the  evils  of  the  separate  system,  particularly  as  ad 
ministered  in  Philadelphia,  sometimes  even  drawing  on  his 
imagination  for  facts,  while  he  carefully  withheld  the  testimony 
in  its  favor. 

At  the  anniversary  of  the  Society  in  May,  1846,  Sumner,  dis 
appointed  at  not  getting  a  hearing  through  a  report,  again 
presented  the  subject  to  the  meeting  and  supported  it  at 
length,  with  a  vigorous  speech,  closing  with  a  motion  for  the 
appointment  of  a  committee  to  examine  the  reports  and  the 
course  of  the  Society  and  see  if  something  could  not  be  done 
to  extend  its  usefulness.  Sumner  was  appointed  on  the  com 
mittee  which  was  to  make  its  report  at  the  next  anniversary 
of  the  Society.  Meantime  the  controversy  was  attracting  pub 
lic  attention.  Sumner's  speech  was  printed  in  the  papers  and 
commented  on.  It  was  reprinted  in  Liverpool,  in  a  pamphlet; 
and  from  England,  France  and  Germany  came  letters  attesting 
interest  in  the  controversy.  De  Tocqueville,  the  author  of 
Democracy  in  America,  who  had  been  interested  in  the  subject 
and  for  that  reason  had  visited  many  of  our  prisons  using  both 
systems,  wrote  Stunner  that  he  was  "  surprised  and  pained  "  at 


174  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  course  of  the  Society.  At  home  it  called  forth  an  able  pam 
phlet  on  the  subject  by  Francis  C.  Gray. 

Meantime  the  anniversary  of  1847  came.  Sumner  for  him 
self  and  Hillard  and  Dr.  Wayland  presented  a  report  of  the 
committee.  It  closed  with  a  series  of  resolutions  which  de 
clared  that  the  Society  was  not  the  pledged  advocate  of  any 
system  and  that  its  reports  should  impartially  set  forth  the 
merits  of  all,  deprecating  anything  in  the  former  reports  that 
may  have  pained  the  directors  of  the  Eastern  Pennsylvania 
Penitentiary  and  asking  the  management  of  the  Society  to 
organize  a  new  system  that  should  enlist  the  co-operation  of  its 
individual  members.  The  adoption  of  the  resolutions  was  op 
posed  and  the  consideration  of  them  was  adjourned  from  May 
25th  to  the  evening  of  May  28th,  when  Sumner  made  a  speech 
supporting  them.  The  discussion  thus  opened  was  followed  up 
by  adjournments  to  June  second,  fourth,  ninth,  eleventh, 
sixteenth,  eighteenth  and  twenty-third.  Attracted  by  the 
contest,  the  meetings  held  in  Tremont  Temple,  were  largely 
attended,  sometimes  as  many  as  two  thousand  people  being 
present,  and  the  audiences  partook  largely  of  the  feeling  of 
the  speakers.  They  were  supported,  besides  Sumner,  by  Howe, 
Hillard,  Eev.  Francis  Parkman  and  Henry  H.  Fuller,  they 
were  opposed  by  Eliot,  Dwight,  Gray,  Bradford  Sumner,  Rev. 
George  Allen,  Dr.  Walter  Channing  and  J.  F.  Stephenson. 
On  the  evening  of  June  18th  Sumner  spoke  again.  It  was  the 
intention  that,  as  Chairman  of  the  committee  reporting  the  reso 
lutions,  he  should,  with  this  speech,  review  and  close  the  debate. 
But  it  had  acquired  too  great  momentum  to  be  so  suddenly  and 
so  decorously  stopped.  This  speech  shows  something  of  the 
accrimony  of  the  debate. 

Commencing,  Sumner  said :  "  Mr.  President,  I  approach  this 
discussion  with  regret,  feeling  that  I  must  say  something  which 
I  would  gladly  leave  unsaid.  I  shall  not,  however,  decline  the 
duty  which  is  cast  upon  me.  In  its  performance  I  hope  to  be 
pardoned,  if  I  speak  frankly  and  freely;  I  trust  it  will  be 
gently  and  kindly.  I  will  borrow  from  the  honorable  Treas 
urer,  with  his  permission,  something  of  his  frankness,  with 
out  his  temper.  As  I  propose  to  adduce  facts,  I  shall  be  grate 
ful  to  any  gentleman  who  will  correct  me  where  I  seem  to  be 
wrong.  For  such  a  purpose  I  will  cheerfully  yield  the  floor, 
even  to  the  Treasurer,  though  his  sense  of  justice  did  not  suffer 
him,  while  on  the  floor,  to  give  me  an  opportunity  of  correcting 
a  misstatement  he  made  of  what  I  said  on  a  former  occasion." 

Referring  to  the  fact  that  Nathaniel  Willis,  a  near  relative 
of  the  Secretary,  had  moved  a  resolution  that  it  was  not  ex^ 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  175 

pedient  to  discuss  this  subject  at  the  anniversary  meeting,  he 
said :  "  It  was  at  the  anniversary  meeting,  however,  that  I  was 
determined  to  discuss  the  subject,  being  assured  that  in  the 
presence  of  a  wakeful  public,  the  will  of  one  or  two  individuals 
could  not  control  the  course  of  the  Society.  Accordingly  I  took 
the  floor  and  proceeded  to  speak,  when  I  was  strangely  encoun 
tered  by  the  Secretary,  who  ejaculated :  '  Mr.  President,  the  an 
nual  meeting  was  interrupted  in  this  manner  last  year ;  there  are 
gentlemen  present  who  are  invited  by  the  committee  of  arrange 
ments  to  address  us/  On  this  remarkable  fragment  of  a  speech 
I  made  no  comment  at  the  time.  I  shall  make  none  now,  but 
I  cannot  forbear  quoting  the  words  of  the  able  editor  of  the 
Law  Eeporter  with  regard  to  it.  '  It  would  seem/  he  says, '  that 
the  addresses  at  the  public  meetings  of  this  Society  are  all  cut 
and  dried  beforehand,  made  to  order, — a  fact  that  might  as 
well  have  been  kept  back,  under  the  circumstances,  for  the  credit 
of  all  concerned/  Notwithstanding  this  interference,  I  pro 
ceeded  to  expose  the  prejudiced  and  partisan  course  of  the 
Society  and  its  consequent  loss  of  credit,  concluding  with  a 
motion  for  a  committee  to  consider  its  past  conduct  and  the 
best  means  of  extending  its  usefulness.  The  motion  though 
opposed  at  the  time,  was  adopted.  It  is  the  report  of  that  com 
mittee  which  is  now  before  you/' 

"  This  report,  when  offered  to  the  Society,  was  first  opposed 
on  grounds  of  form.  It  is  now  opposed  on  other  grounds, 
hardly  more  pertinent,  though  not  of  form  only.  Thus  at 
every  step  have  honest  efforts  to  elevate  the  character  of  the 
Society,  and  to  extend  its  usefulness,  been  encountered  by  op 
position.  Under  the  auspices  of  the  Treasurer  and  Secretary, 
the  Society  shrinks  from  examination  and  inquiry.  Like  the 
sensitive  leaf,  it  closes  at  the  touch.  Nay,  more,  it  repels  all 
endeavor  to  wake  it  to  new  life.  It  seems  to  have  adopted,  as 
its  guardian  motto,  that  remarkable  epitaph  which  for  more 
than  two  centuries  has  preserved  from  examination  and  intru 
sion  the  sacred  remains  of  the  greatest  master  of  our  tongue : — 

"  '  Good  friend,  for  Jesus'  sake  forbear 
To  dig  the  dust  enclosed  here ! 
Blest  be  the  man  that  spares  these  stones, 
And  curst  be  he  that  moves  my  bones ! ' ' 

In  urging  the  adoption  of  a  resolution,  asking  that  a  new 
system  should  be  adopted  by  the  management  of  the  Society  so 
as  to  enlist  the  co-operation  of  the  individual  members,  Sumner 
showed  his  entire  want  of  appreciation  of  this  management  of 
the  Society.  "  Look  at  our  grandiose  organization,"  he  said. 


176  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

"  We  have  a  President  with  forty  Vice-Presidents, — or  borrow 
ing  an  illustration  from  Turkey,  '  a  pacha  with  forty  tails.' 
Then  we  have  a  large  body  of  foreign  correspondents,  whose 
names  we  print  in  capitals, — '  fancy  men '  as  they  have  been 
called,  because  they  are  for  show,  I  suppose,  like  our  Vice 
Presidents.  Then  there  are  scores  of  Directors,  and  a  Board 
of  Managers.  Now  I  know  full  well,  that  of  these  very  few 
interest  themselves  so  much  in  our  Society  as  to  attend  its 
sessions.  At  the  meeting  last  year  for  the  choice  of  officers 
there  were  ten  present.  We  ten  chose  the  whole  array  of 
Vice-Presidents  and  all.  And  then,  too,  the  Secretary  politely 
furnished  us  printed  tickets  bearing  their  names  and  his  own. 
Certainly,  sir,  something  should  be  done  to  mend  this  matter. 
We  must  cease  to  have  so  many  officers,  or  they  must  partici 
pate  actively  in  the  duties  of  the  Society." 

"  Look  at  our  annual  income.  Notwithstanding  the  special 
pleading  of  the  Treasurer,  I  must  insist  that  this  is  upwards  of 
$3,000." 

"But  what  does  it  accomplish?  On  looking  at  its  journal 
for  the  last  three  years,  it  appears  that  the  chief  business  of  the 
Managers,  who  have  met  some  three  or  four  times  in  the  year, 
only  has  been  to  vote  a  salary  of  seventeen  hundred  dollars  to 
the  Secretary,  with  fuel  and  rent  for  his  office  sometimes  and 
also  to  vote  a  vacation  for  four  months  in  the  country  during 
our  pleasant  summers." 

So  the  debate  ran  on.  It  was  about  midnight  of  June  23rd 
when  it  closed.  Dwight  was  crushed ;  but  Eliot  was  as  pompous 
as  ever.  The  audience,  more  interested  in  witnessing  the  con 
test  than  in  the  vote,  were  beginning  to  leave,  when  an  unex 
pected  motion  to  lay  the  question  on  the  table  prevailed ;  and 
so  the  whole  matter  went  over  for  that  year.  But  the  society 
was  discredited.  It  never  held  another  public  meeting.  It  con 
tinued  in  existence  for  a  few  years  longer,  supported  mainly  by 
Dwight's  friends,  to  furnish  him  a  livelihood  and  when  he  died, 
it  died  with  him.  The  officers  recommended  its  dissolution  for 
the  reason  that  no  suitable  successor  to  Dwight  could  be  found. 

Amusing  as  much  of  this  controversy  seems,  it  is  important 
as  showing  the  earliest  development  of  a  strong  point  in  Sum- 
ner's  character.  For  the  first  time,  he  then  showed  his  ability 
to  maintain  himself  in  a  sustained  and  heated  controversy. 
Save  his  studied  addresses  he  had  been  enured  thus  far  only  to 
books  and  friends,  and  an  occasional  decorous  contest  of  the 
court-room.  But  now  for  the  first  time  was  seen  his  ability  to 
give  as  well  as  take  blows,  in  the  free  discussions  of  a  delibera 
tive  body. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  177 

Another  good  work  that  Sumner  sought  to  promote  about 
this  time,  more  nearly  allied  to  his  efforts  against  slavery,  was 
his  effort  to  prevent  colored  children  being  longer  excluded 
from  the  white  schools  in  Boston.  With  Kobert  Morris,  a  col 
ored  attorney,  he  brought  suit  for  Sarah  C.  Eoberts,  a  colored 
child,  against  the  city,  for  damages  for  refusing  her  the  privil 
eges  of  the  white  schools.  The  contest  had  been  going  on  for 
some  years,  in  the  School  Committee,  before  it  found  its  way 
into  the  courts.  Attorneys  had  submitted  opinions  upon  the 
question  to  the  Committee,  the  newspapers  had  discussed  it, 
but  the  Committee  was  still  divided. 

It  was  urged  that,  as  there  were  not  so  many  colored  as  white 
children,  to  require  their  separation  was  to  compel  the  colored 
to  travel  long  distances,  and  often  suffer  other  inconveniences, 
to  reach  a  school.  In  this  case  a  little  girl  only  five  years  old, 
was  compelled,  if  she  attended  a  colored  school,  to  travel  2,100 
feet  and  pass  on  the  way  five  white  schools;  while  the  nearest 
white  school  was  only  900  feet  from  her  door.  This  was  a 
hardship  that  was  not  to  be  disregarded  by  the  parents  of  a 
child,  so  tender  in  years,  during  the  severe  winters  of  Boston. 
Another  instance  was  given  of  a  respectable  colored  man  of  East 
Boston,  separated  from  the  mainland  by  water  and  having  no 
colored  schools,  where  he  lived,  who  was  compelled  to  pay  the 
ferry  tolls  for  his  three  children,  a  severe  tax  upon  the  small 
means  of  a  poor  man,  and  then  see  his  children  travel  a  long 
distance  in  all  kinds  of  weather,  likewise  a  severe  tax  upon  their 
strength.  And  all  this  was  done  that  children  in  a  country 
where  schools  were  free,  might  enjoy  the  privileges  of  an  edu 
cation.  Besides,  it  was  urged  that  the  separation  degraded  the 
colored  children  and  placed  them  under  the  ban  of  a  caste,  that 
was  alike  unjust  to  them  and  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  our  in 
stitutions. 

Sumner  in  opening  his  argument,  before  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Massachusetts,  said  "  It  would  be  difficult  to  image  any  case 
appealing  more  strongly  to-  the  best  judgment  of  the  court, 
whether  you  regarded  the  parties  or  the  subject.  On  the  one 
side  was  the  city  of  Boston,  strong  in  wealth,  influence,  char 
acter;  on  the  other  a  little  child  of  degraded  color,  of  humble 
parents  and  still  within  the  period  of  natural  infancy,  but 
strong  from  her  very  weakness,  and  from  the  irrepressible  sym 
pathies  of  good  men,  which  by  a  divine  compensation  come  to 
succor  the  weak."  This  little  child,  he  said,  asked  at  the  hands 
of  the  court  her  personal  rights.  So  doing  she  called  upon  it 
to  decide  a  question  which  concerned  the  personal  rights  of 
other  colored  children — which  concerned  the  Constitution  and 


178          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

laws  of  the  Commonwealth,  which  concerned  the  common 
schools  of  New  England  and  likewise  the  Christian  character  of 
the  community. 

Sumner  then  proceeded  to  make  a  careful  argument  in  sup 
port  of  his  position.  He  insisted  that  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  holding  that  all  men  are  created  equal  was  embodied 
in  substance  in  the  bill  of  rights  of  the  constitution  of  Massa 
chusetts.  He  argued  that  this  provision,  of  necessity  secured 
to  all  children  of  the  State  the  same  educational  advantages, 
that  it  was  a  violation  of  the  fundamental  law  of  the  State  for 
the  School  Committee  of  Boston  to  fix  just  two  primary  schools 
in  that  great  city,  where  colored  children  might  receive  instruc 
tion,  while  the  city  was  dotted  all  over  with  schools  for  the 
education  of  those  of  a  more  fortunate  color.  He  then  showed 
that  this  declaration  of  the  Constitution  had  been  embodied  in 
the  statutes  of  the  State  and  the  decisions  of  the  Courts,  that 
within  the  language  of  all  there  was  nowhere  any  room  for  the 
discrimination  that  was  being  made.  He  dwelt  upon  the  evil 
results  to  follow  the  creation  of  an  aristocracy  by  law.  He  made 
his  argument  more  a  discussion  of  the  intrinsic  merits  of  the 
question  than  is  customary  in  arguments  to  a  court,  with  a 
view  to  its  being  read  by  the  general  public.  It  was  some  time 
afterwards  distributed  as  a  tract  in  other  states  where  an  effort 
was  being  made  to  abolish  the  discrimination  against  colored 
children  in  the  schools. 

In  closing,  he  reverted  to  his  own  experience,  when  at  the 
Law  School  in  Paris,  he  had  sat  for  weeks  on  the  same  benches 
with  colored  pupils  listening  to  the  lectures  of  De  Gerando  and 
Rossi  and  could  see  no  feeling  shown  towards  them  except  of 
companionship  and  respect.  And  again  at  the  Convent  of 
Palazzolo,  on  the  shores  of  the  Alban  Lake  in  Italy,  where 
"amidst  scenes  of  natural  beauty  enhanced  by  historical  as 
sociations/'  he  had  seen  a  native  of  Abyssinia  mingle  familiarly 
with  the  Franciscan  friars  whose  scholar  he  was.  "  Do  I  err," 
he  asked,  "  in  saying  that  the  Christian  spirit  shines  in  these 
examples  ?  " 

But  the  court  refused  the  relief  sought  and  sustained  the  dis 
crimination  made  by  the  School  Committee.  Sumner  always 
regretted  that  they  thus  refused  the  opportunity  of  establishing 
a  precedent  upon  the  question  of  schools,  as  the  court  had  al 
ready  done  upon  the  subject  of  slavery.  But  five  years  later 
the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  advanced  to  the  position  Sum 
ner  had  taken,  by  enacting  a  law  declaring  that  race,  color  or 
religious  opinion  should  make  no  distinction  in  the  admission 
of  any  child  to  the  public  schools  of  the  State  and  making  the 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  179 

School  Committee  excluding  a  child,  for  such  reason,  from  any 
public  school,  liable  to  him  for  damages.  And  this  has  ever 
since  remained  the  law  of  Massachusetts.  As  in  other  instances 
Sumner  was  now  only  in  advance  of  the  public. 

For  a  member  of  the  bar,  a  profession  proverbially  conserv 
ative,  he  was  singularly  free  from  devotion  to  anything  merely 
because  it  was  established.  But  it  is  probable  that  we  should 
now  class  him  among  reformers  instead  of  among  lawyers. 
Much  of  his  time  was  given  to  the  reforms  he  had  interested 
himself  in  and  he  was  much  in  the  company  of  their  advocates. 
The  law  was  fast  losing  its  charms.  William  Kent,  Judge 
Story's  successor  in  the  Law  School,  and  others  of  his  friends, 
remembering  how  enthusiastic  he  had  been  in  his  legal  studies 
and  what  an  ornament,  one,  of  his  literary  tastes,  had  promised 
to  be  to  the  profession,  saw  the  change  with  regret  and  kindly 
remonstrated  with  him  about  it.  But  he  knew  better  than  they 
his  reasons  for  it. 

His  success  in  the  law  had  not  met  his  expectations.  He  did 
not  often  appear  in  court  in  the  trial  of  cases.  And  his  fees 
were  not  large.  It  is  estimated  that  his  yearly  earnings,  in  his 
profession,  did  not  exceed  $1,000  to  $2,000,  a  year,  not  more 
than  sufficient  for  his  personal  expenses,  though  boarding,  with 
out  charge  at  the  family  home.  What  law  business  he  did  was 
carefully  done ;  but  it  was  mostly  work  in  his  office  for  clients, 
who  sought  his  advice  or  assistance  in  the  settlement  of  es 
tates  and  in  making  collections.  These  things  he  naturally  felt 
were  beneath  the  deserts  of  one  who  had  spent  such  years  in 
toilsome  preparation  as  he  had.  It  was  galling  to  see  young 
men,  of  much  less  desert,  but  of  more  fortunate  connections, 
distancing  him  in  the  race  for  business. 

His  experience  as  a  Lyceum  Lecturer  had  been  an  attractive 
one  and  his  public  addresses  had  been  notably  successful.  They 
opened  up  to  him  new  fields  of  pleasure  and  usefulness  and 
were  a  new  spur  to  his  ambition.  The  delightful  friendships, 
the  public  recognition,  the  consciousness  of  a  widened  influence 
and  the  hope  of  a  larger  fame,  in  this  new  field,  were  ail  unit 
ing  to  draw  him  away  from  the  law,  a  profession  whose  active 
practice  he  had  to  confess  had  never  been  attractive  to  him. 

At  his  office  his  friends  still  dropped  in  upon  him  and  they 
rarely  found  him  too  busy  to  spend  an  hour  in  discussing  the 
newest  book  or  latest  poem.  He  still  spent  his  evenings  at 
home,  reading  far  into  the  night, — so  late  as  to  draw  from 
Horace  Mann,  who  was  solicitous  for  his  health,  the  remark 
that  he  yielded  obedience  to  all  God's  laws  of  morality,  but 
thought  he  was  exempt  from  every  obligation  to  obey  his  laws 
of  physiology, 


CHAPTER  XVI 

ADMISSION  OF  STATE  OF  TEXAS — MEXICAN  WAR — SUMNER^S  OP 
POSITION  TO  IT — NOMINATED  FOR  CONGRESS — DECLINES — 
DELEGATE  TO  WHIG  CONVENTIONS — SPEECH  FOR  ACTION 

AGAINST   SLAVERY WHITTIER?S   POEM,   "  THE  PINE   TREE  " 

WINTHROP     RE-ELECTED CANDIDATES     OF     OLD     PARTIES 

FOR  PRESIDENT  UNSATISFACTORY VAN  BUREN  NOMINATED 

BY     THE     ANTI-SLAVERY     PEOPLE SUMNER     A     CAMPAIGN 

SPEAKER — AGAIN  NOMINATED  FOR  CONGRESS  AND  AGAIN 
DECLINES — CHAIRMAN  OF  STATE  COMMITTEE  OF  FREE  SOIL 
PARTY 

ON  the  29th  day  of  December,  1846,  the  State  of  Texas  was 
admitted  into  the  Union,  with  a  pro-slavery  constitution.  This 
was  another  victory  for  slavery.  It  gave  her  two  more  votes  in 
the  Senate  and  six  more  in  the  House.  The  friends  of  Freedom 
had  resisted,  but  in  vain.  Slavery  was  then  dominant  every 
where.  She  had  a  submissive  President  and  a  well-trained 
representation  in  both  the  Senate  and  the  House.  By  a  skilful 
manipulation  of  the  votes  she  could  furnish,  for  the  tariff  and 
the  internal  improvements  desired  by  the  North,  and  the  ad 
vantages  in  training,  by  reason  of  the  longer  terms  of  service 
usually  accorded  her  statesmen,  she  had  a  compact  and  efficient 
organization  for  the  advancement  of  her  interests.  Her  repre 
sentatives  in  Washington  were  frequently  men  of  large  property, 
who  had  been  accustomed  to  spend  their  summers  on  their  plan 
tations,  with  the  easy  life  of  country  gentlemen  and  their  win 
ters  in  city  homes,  fond  of  society  and  pleasure,  and  everywhere 
dispensing  an  easy  hospitality.  They  frequently  brought  their 
slaves  to  the  capital  and  entertained  handsomely  and  thus  ruled 
the  society  of  Washington.  To  enjoy  their  favor  was  to  have 
social  recognition  in  abundance,  but  their  disfavor  often  made 
life  in  the  capital  unpleasant.  So  far,  the  South  had  not  ex 
perienced  political  adversity.  She  knew  what  she  wanted  and 
how  to  get  it. 

The  consciousness  of  this  power  naturally  made  Southern 
statesmen  bolder.  When  they  had  added  Texas  as  a  new  State 
to  the  Union,  they  were  not  satisfied  with  her  boundaries  as 
defined,  by  the  river  Nueces,  but  they  coveted  the  country  be 
tween  that  river  and  the  Rio  Grande.  United  States  troops, 

180 


LIFE  OP  CHARLES  SUMNER  181 

under  General  Taylor,  were  sent  to  occupy  it.  Mexico  resisted 
this  encroachment  upon  her  territory  and  the  Mexican  War  fol 
lowed.  Congress  was  asked  to  vote  the  necessary  supplies  and  a 
bill  was  promptly  introduced  which  declared : 

"  Whereas,  by  the  act  of  the  Republic  of  Mexico,  a  state  of 
war  exists  between  that  Government  and  the  United  States, — 

"Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  That  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  to  prosecute  said  war  to  a 
speedy  and  successful  termination,  the  President  be,  and  he  is 
hereby  authorized  to  employ  the  militia,  naval  and  military 
forces  of  the  United  States,  and  to  call  for  and  accept  the  ser 
vices  of  any  number  of  volunteers,  not  exceeding  fifty  thousand, 
and  that  the  sum  of  ten  millions  of  dollars  be  and  the  same  is 
hereby  appropriated  for  the  purpose." 

This  bill  was  passed  by  overwhelming  majorities  in  both 
Houses  of  Congress  and  was  promptly  approved  by  the  Pres 
ident.  The  administration  was  in  favor  of  this  defensive  war. 
But  of  the  Massachusetts  delegation  in  the  House  only  two 
voted  for  it,  one  of  these  was  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  who  repre 
sented  Sumner's  own  district.  He  was  a  personal  friend  of 
Sumner,  about  his  own  age,  and  they  had  known  each  other 
from  childhood.  They  had  been  at  the  Boston  Latin  School 
together  and  together  again  at  Harvard.  After  leaving 
Harvard,  their  paths  had  diverged.  Winthrop  had  been 
elected  to  the  State  Legislature  and  later  became  Speaker. 
Later  still,  he  was  sent  to  Congress  and  now  he  was  a  prospec 
tive  candidate  for  Speaker  of  the  House ;  coming  thus  early  and 
continuously  to  public  life,  with  good  ability  and  a  fine  pres 
ence,  he  had  developed  into  an  able  and  graceful  speaker.  He 
was  descended  from  one  of  the  Puritan  Governors  of  the  Colony 
and  living  in  a  city  where  ancestry  always  counted  for  much, 
he  numbered  among  his  friends  and  relatives  many  of  the  best 
people  of  his  district.  As  would  be  expected  from  these  sur 
roundings,  Winthrop  was  an  agreeable,  companionable  gentle 
man.  He  was  always  careful  to  observe  the  amenities  of  life 
and  Sumner  himself  was  indebted  to  him  for  many  courtesies, 
often  met  him  in  society,  had  dined  with  him  in  Washington 
and  was  familiar  in  his  home  in  Boston. 

With  his  strong  anti-slavery  convictions,  Sumner,  however, 
was  chagrined  at  Winthrop's  vote,  on  the  Mexican  War  Bill. 
He  had  publicly  denounced  the  annexation  of  Texas  as  an  un 
just  aggression  of  slavery.  And  now  that  we  should  be  plunged 
into  a  war,  for  the  acquisition  of  the  territory  of  a  neighboring 
friendly  nation,  and  an  offensive  war  too,  which  Sumner  be 
lieved  to  be  wrong,  was,  as  he  felt,  the  perpetration  of  a  national 


182  LIF®  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

crime.  There  was  a  considerable  party  of  people  in  Boston  who 
felt  as  he  did.  Boston  was  the  home  of  William  Lloyd  Garrison,, 
the  leader  of  the  anti-slavery  men  of  the  country ;  and  there  he 
published  his  paper,  The  Liberator,  which  advocated  the  aboli 
tion  of  slavery,  even  at  the  sacrifice  of  the  Union.  Quincy,  a 
suburb  of  Boston,  was  the  home  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  who 
had  been  sustained  for  years  as  the  member  for  that  district  in 
the  House  of  Eepresentatives,  where  almost  alone  he  had  defied 
the  slave-power  and  was  now  the  recognized  champion  of  Free 
dom  upon  the  floor.  So  that  the  anti-slavery  movement  in 
Boston  at  that  time  had  some  strength  and  some  ability  to  make 
itself  felt. 

But  still  it  must  be  admitted  there  was  a  decided  majority  of 
the  voters  of  Boston  against  it.  Her  seamen  had  a  considerable 
carrying  trade  with  the  South  and  her  merchants  had  many 
customers  there.  They  felt  that  the  interest  of  this  trade  and 
the  tariff  which  was  to  be  regarded  as  an  off-set  in  the  North  to 
slavery  in  the  South,  both  of  which  appealed  to  their  pockets, 
were  to  be  placed  above  this  merely  moral  issue.  Daniel  Web 
ster  was  the  ruling  spirit  and  he,  with  such  men  as  Nathan 
Appleton  and  George  Ticknor,  intensely  conservative,  satisfied 
with  the  present  order  of  things,  which  guaranteed  their  su 
premacy  and  opposed  to  any  change,  which  might  result  in 
bringing  new  men  to  the  front,  were  still  easily  able  to  control 
Boston.  And  so  it  was  to  continue  yet  awhile.  But  influences 
were  at  work  which  were  soon  to  bring  about  a  revolution  in 
sentiment. 

The  excitement  following  the  declaration  of  war,  caused  Win- 
throp's  vote  to  be  overlooked,  for  two  months  after  it  was  cast. 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  in  the  Whig,  was  the  first  to  call  atten 
tion  to  it.  It  was  then  taken  up  by  other  papers  and  an  ex 
tended  and  somewhat  acrimonious  discussion  followed,  some 
justifying  it,  and  others  condemning  it.  Sumner  did  not  at 
first  enter  into  the  discussion,  but  being  pressed  by  his  friends, 
Adams  and  Howe,  who  knew  from  conversation,  how  he  re 
garded  the  vote,  he  took  up  the  discussion  and  wrote  three 
articles,  which  were  published  anonymously,  but  whose  author 
ship  he  did  not  attempt  to  conceal  from  Winthrop. 

On  the  25th  of  October,  1846,  Sumner  addressed  Winthrop 
an  open  letter.  He  carefully  disclaimed  any  feeling,  other  than 
that  of  good  will,  mingled  with  recollections  of  pleasant  social 
intercourse  with  him  and  insisted  upon  discussing  his  vote 
merely  as  an  official  act  for  which  he  was  responsible  to  the 
people  who  had  elected  him  and  whose  Representative  he  was. 
He  also  declined  to  discuss  it,  according  to  any  scale  of  party 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  183 

expediency,  but  only  asked  whether  it  was  Eight  or  Wrong.  He 
argued  that  Congress  alone  had  power  to  declare  war  and  that 
without  the  passage  of  this  act,  which  his  vote  sanctioned,  the 
war  could  have  no  legal  existence,  that  it  was  thus  created  and 
legalized  and  the  means  were  thus  furnished  to  continue  an  un 
just  and  cowardly  attack  by  a  strong  nation  upon  a  weak  one, 
merely  with  intent  to  rob  it  of  its  territory.  He  insisted  that 
the  preamble  of  the  law,  reciting  that  "by  the  act  of  the 
Republic  of  Mexico,  a  state  of  war  exists,"  was  a  "  brazen  false 
hood,  and  that,  through  him,  his  constituents  were  made  to 
declare  unjust  and  cowardly  war,  with  superadded  falsehood, 
in  the  cause  of  slavery/'  To  Winthrop's  apology  that  he  simply 
voted  with  the  majority  of  the  Whigs,  Sumner  answered 
"  These  majorities  cannot  make  us  hesitate  to  condemn  such 
acts  and  their  authors.  Aloft  on  the  throne  of  God,  and  not 
below  in  the  footprints  of  a  trampling  multitude,  are  sacred 
rules  of  Right,  which  no  majorities  can  displace  or  overturn." 
He  insisted  that  the  rules  of  right  and  wrong  are  the  same  for 
nations  as  for  individuals  and  that  as  Winthrop  would  not  lie, 
in  his  private  life,  so  he  ought  not  by  his  official  vote  to  involve 
his  constituents  and  his  country  in  falsehood.  He  appealed  to 
him  to  remember  that  he  represented  the  conscience  of  Boston 
and  the  churches  of  the  Pilgrims  and  urged  him  upon  his  return 
to  Congress  to  lose  no  time  in  righting  the  wrong  he  had  com 
mitted. 

"  It  were  idle  to  suppose,"  Sumner  wrote,  "  that  the  soldier 
or  officer  only  is  stained  by  this  guilt.  It  reaches  far  back  and 
incarnadines  the  Halls  of  Congress;  nay,  more,  through  you, 
it  reddens  the  hands  of  your  constituents  in  Boston."  Again : 
"  Blood !  Blood !  is  on  the  hands  of  the  Representative  from 
Boston.  Not  all  great  Neptune's  ocean  can  wash  them  clean." 

These  expressions  were  especially  offensive  to  Winthrop.  He 
insisted  that  his  vote  had  been  conscientiously  given  and  that  it 
was  unfair  to  employ  such  language  towards  him.  He  declined 
any  further  communications  with  Sumner  and  refused  his  hand, 
saying :  "  his  hand  was  not  at  the  service  of  any  one  who  had 
denounced  it  with  such  ferocity,  as  being  stained  with  blood." 
Coming,  as  all  this  did,  on  the  eve  of  Winthrop's  re-election,  it 
was  freely  discussed  as  one  of  the  issues  in  the  campaign.  The 
canvass  of  his  votes  and  speeches  in  Congress,  where  they 
touched  upon  the  slavery  question,  gave  him  a  disagreeable 
prominence.  Winthrop  was  a  sensitive  man  and  in  his  speeches 
in  the  campaign  resented  Sumner's  action  and  referred  to  his 
strictures  in  no  complimentary  terms.  The  affair  caused  a  com 
plete  rupture  of  their  friendly  relations  and  for  fifteen  years 


184          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

they  did  not  speak  or  even  recognize  one  another  when  they  met. 
Each  pursued  his  own  way  upon  the  question  of  slavery  and  it 
is  curious  to  note  with  what  results. 

During  his  absence  upon  a  lecturing  tour  in  Maine,  Sumner 
was  nominated  for  Congress.  The  feeling  against  Winthrop 
among  anti-slavery  men  had  become  so  strong,  that  they  would 
not  vote  for  him.  It  could  do  no  good  and  would  show  no  more 
consistency  to  vote  for  either  of  the  other  candidates,  the 
Democrat  or  the  Independent.  Besides  anti-slavery  men  felt 
that  the  time  had  come  for  them  to  act  independently  of  the 
old  parties  and  unite,  as  a  separate  organization,  upon  the  one 
issue  of  slavery.  A  meeting  was  held  in  Tremont  Temple  on 
the  evening  of  October  29,  1846.  It  was  called  to  order  by  Dr. 
Howe.  Charles  Francis  Adams  was  elected  President  and  John 
A.  Andrew,  afterwards  the  War  Governor  of  Massachusetts  was 
chairman  of  the  committee  to  propose  a  candidate  and  draft 
resolutions. 

Sumner  when  privately  approached  had  repeatedly  refused 
to  allow  the  use  of  his  name  as  a  candidate.  Besides  his  un 
willingness  to  enter  public  life  he  did  not  desire  his  criticism  of 
Winthrop  to  be  weakened,  by  the  imputation  that  it  was  inspired 
by  an  unworthy  ambition  for  his  place.  Mr.  Andrews  made  a 
speech  before  the  meeting,  in  support  of  the  nomination,  in 
which  he  said :  "  this  nomination  has  been  made  upon  the  entire 
responsibility  and  sense  of  duty  of  this  committee, — not  only 
without  the  knowledge,  approbation,  or  consent  of  Mr.  Sumner, 
but  in  the  face  of  his  constant,  repeated  and  determined  refusal, 
at  all  times,  to  allow  his  name  even  for  a  moment,  to  be  held  at 
the  disposal  of  friends  for  such  a  purpose."  They  felt,  how 
ever,  that  Sumner  was  the  logical  candidate  and  they  hoped  to 
overcome  his  scruples  against  standing  for  the  place.  But 
Sumner  was  determined;  and  upon  his  return  from  Bangor, 
two  days  later,  by  an  open  letter,  he  declined  to  allow  the  use  of 
his  name ;  and  that  of  Dr.  Howe  was  substituted. 

At  the  Whig  primary  in  1846,  Sumner  was  chosen  one  of  the 
delegates  from  Boston  to  the  State  Convention.  The  Conven 
tion  was  held  in  Boston.  A  caucus  of  the  Boston  delegation  was 
held  at  the  United  States  Hotel,  the  evening  preceding  the  Con 
vention,  at  which  the  differences  between  the  older  and  younger 
Whigs  became  apparent.  The  older  leaders  desired  that  there 
should  be  no  split  in  the  party  and  urged  that  the  delegation 
should  stand  together,  in  the  convention,  for  a  platform  which 
would  put  forward  the  old  issues  of  the  tariff  and  internal  im 
provements  and  keep  back  those  of  slavery  and  State  rights, — a 
platform  which  would  be  broad  enough  to  unite  both  wings  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  185 

the  party,  Forth  and  South.  The  younger  Whigs  believed  that 
the  moral  issues  were  of  paramount  importance  and  should  be 
put  forward. 

The  same  difference  appeared  in  the  Convention,  the  next 
day.  It  had  been  arranged  that  after  the  business  of  the  Con 
vention  had  been  transacted  about  which  there  was  little  con 
troversy,  the  selection  of  officers  and  candidates,  that  Eobert  C. 
Winthrop  should  introduce  the  other  business,  that  of  drafting 
the  platform,  in  a  carefully  prepared  speech,  counselling  mod 
eration  and  an  adherence  to  the  landmarks  of  the  party.  But 
the  younger  Whigs,  advised  in  advance  of  this  programme,  be 
fore  Winthrop  could  be  brought  forward,  called  loudly  from 
different  parts  of  the  hall  for  Sumner.  He  responded  to  the 
call  and  advanced  to  the  platform  and  spoke  earnestly  upon  the 
anti-slavery  duties  of  the  Whig  party,  urging  the  Convention 
not  to  lose  sight  of  the  great  responsibilities  of  the  hour,  but  to 
act  firmly  and  take  high  ground  upon  the  question  of  slavery. 
When  Sumner  stopped,  Winthrop  followed  him,  with  his  speech 
as  previously  arranged  and  showed  some  feeling  in  his  manner, 
towards  Sumner. 

By  this  time  the  committee  on  resolutions,  which  had  retired 
before  the  call  was  made  for  Sumner,  was  ready  to  report. 
Its  report  was  not  satisfactory  to  the  anti-slavery  Whigs  and 
an  amendment  was  offered  by  Stephen  C.  Phillips,  embodying 
their  views.  In  offering  his  amendment  he  supported  it  by  a 
brief  speech,  which  was  answered  by  Linus  Child,  and  he  was 
in  turn  replied  to  by  Charles  Francis  Adams,  all  showing  some 
feeling.  Each  of  the  speeches  was  loudly  applauded  by  their 
respective  supporters.  By  this  time  the  convention  was  in  an 
uproar  and  bid  fair  to  disband  in  confusion.  Lawrence,  Win 
throp  and  Child  were  seen  in  anxious  consultation,  and  imme 
diately  Fletcher  Webster  left  the  hall.  He  soon  returned  and 
after  a  whispered  conversation,  Lawrence  went  out. 

In  a  few  minutes  Lawrence  was  seen,  returning  with  Daniel 
Webster  on  his  arm.  The  sight  of  the  aged  statesman  with  his 
marvelous  presence  and  manner,  such  as  perhaps  no  other  man 
ever  had,  around  which  was  now  gathered  the  halo  of  his  great 
name,  was  enough  to  set  a  Whig  convention  in  Boston  wild  with 
enthusiasm.  On  the  arm  of  Lawrence,  Webster  walked  slowly 
up  the  aisle  the  whole  length  of  the  hall,  to  the  platform.  The 
delegates  mounted  upon  their  seats,  waving  their  hats  and 
handkerchiefs  and  shouted  themselves  hoarse.  It  was  a  scene 
long  to  be  remembered. 

The  debate  upon  the  amendment  to  the  platform  ceased  upon 
the  appearance  of  Mr,  Webster,  When  he  reached  the  stage 


186  LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

and  took  his  seat,  after  order  was  restored,  the  debate  was 
resumed.  But  the  fate  of  the  amendment  was  already  sealed. 
His  appearance  at  the  decisive  moment,  with  Mr.  Lawrence, 
whose  opposition  was  already  known,  Mr.  Webster's  own  views 
upon  the  necessity  of  a  union  of  all  the  Whigs,  so  often  ex 
pressed  and  emphasized,  something  in  his  manner  now,  which 
told  where  he  stood,  the  encouragement  it  gave  the  opposition 
and  the  embarrassment  it  caused  the  supporters  of  the  amend 
ment,  were  too  much.  Besides,  the  country  delegates  were 
compelled  to  leave,  to  catch  the  trains  for  their  homes.  This 
operated  against  the  anti-slavery  men,  for  they  were  generally 
in  favor  of  the  amendment,  while  the  Boston  delegates,  a  large 
proportion  of  the  Convention,  were  generally  opposed  to  it. 
And  the  amendment  was  lost. 

Mr.  Webster,  thus  far,  had  not  spoken  a  word.  But  after  the 
vote  was  taken,  he  made  a  short  speech  to  the  Convention  and 
again  aroused  it  to  the  highest  enthusiasm.  He  urged  the  im 
portance  of  a  union  of  all  the  Whigs,  saying :  "  Others  rely  on 
other  foundations  and  other  hopes  for  the  welfare  of  the 
country;  but  for  my  part,  in  the  dark  and  troubled  night  that 
is  upon  us,  I  see  no  star  above  the  horizon  promising  light  to 
guide  us,  but  the  intelligent,  patriotic,  united  Whig  party  of 
the  United  States." 

Sumner  had  referred  to  Webster  in  addressing  the  Conven 
tion  and  had  urged  him  to  espouse  the  cause  of  Freedom,  and 
add  the  title  of  Defender  of  Humanity  to  the  other  titles  he 
had  already  earned — Defender  of  the  Constitution  and  De 
fender  of  Peace, — assuring  him  that  he  would  thereby  add  to 
the  fame  that  was  already  his.  Two  days  later  he  addressed  Mr. 
Webster  a  letter  in  which,  after  expressing  his  high  regard  for 
him,  he  again  pressed  him  to  declare  himself  against  the  ag 
gressions  of  the  slave  power.  To  this  letter,  ten  days  later, 
Mr.  Webster  replied  that  he  had  ever  cherished  a  high  respect 
for  Sumner's  character  and  talents  and  had  seen  with  pleasure 
the  promise  of  his  future  eminence,  but  confessed  that  in  politi 
cal  affairs  they  entertained  a  difference  of  opinion  and  took  a 
different  view  of  the  line  of  duty  most  fit  to  be  pursued. 

John  G.  Whittier,  on  the  other  hand,  after  reading  the  report 
of  Sumner's  speech  and  the  other  proceedings  of  the  Conven 
tion,  sent  him  his  poem,  "The  Pine  Tree,"  in  autograph. 

"  Lift  again  the  stately  emblem  on  the  Bay  State's  rusted  shield, 
Give  to  Northern  winds  the  Pine  Tree  on  our  banner's  tattered  fields; 
Sons  of  men  who  sat  in  council  with  their  Bibles  round  the  board, 
Answering  England's  royal  missive  with  a  firm  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  " 
Rise  again  for  home  and  freedom! — set  the  battle  in  array! — 
What  the  fathers  did  of  old  times  we  their  sons  must  do  to-day." 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  187 

'Tell  us  not  of  banks  and  tariffs — cease  your  paltry,  pedler  cries, — 
Shall  the  good  State  sink  her  honor  that  your  gambling  stocks  may  rise? 
Would  you  barter  man  for  cotton  ?    That  your  gains  may  sum  up  higher, 
Must  we  kiss  the  feet  of  Moloch,  pass  our  children  through  the  fire? 
Is  the  dollar  only  real? — God  and  Truth  and  Right  a  dream? 
Weighed  against  your  lying  ledgers  must  our  manhood  kick  the  beam? 
*  *  *  Where's  the  man  for  Massachusetts?    Where's  the  voice  to  speak 

her  free? 

Where's  the  hand  to  light  up  bonfires  from  her  mountains  to  the  sea? 
Beats  her  Pilgrim  pulse  no  longer  ?     Sits  she  dumb  in  her  despair? — 
Has  she  none  to  break  the  silence  ?    Has  she  none  to  do  and  dare  ? 
O  my  God!  for  one  right  worthy  to  lift  up  her  rusted  shield, 
And  to  plant  again  the  Pine  Tree  in  her  banner's  tattered  field  ?  " 

Little  did  Whittier  then  see  the  future  of  the  young  man  he 
addressed  and  how  fully  he  was  to  realize,  in  him,  the  wish  of 
that  hour ! 

But  it  was  too  early  then  for  any  one  to  see  far  into  the  future 
upon  the  question  of  slavery.  The  election  came.  Winthrop 
had  5,980  votes;  Howe  only  1,334;  Homer  (Democrat),  1,688; 
Whiton  (Independent),  331.  The  issue  which  Winthrop  repre 
sented  and  the  fight  made  against  him  by  the  anti-slavery  men, 
attracted  to  him  a  good  many  votes  from  the  Democrats,  who 
had  no  chance  of  electing  their  candidate,  and  he  was  trium 
phantly  elected.  The  large  vote  he  received  was  an  apparent 
vindication  of  his  vote  on  the  Mexican  War  bill  as  well  as  his 
record  upon  the  slavery  question.  Sumner's  efforts  to  the  con 
trary  seemed  futile. 

But  the  end  was  not  yet ;  and  the  subsequent  careers  of  Win 
throp  and  Sumner  present  a  curious  contrast  in  the  anti- 
slavery  contest.  Winthrop,  in  1847,  was  a  candidate  for 
Speaker  of  the  House  and  his  course  in  Congress  and  in  the 
last  campaign  having  satisfied  the  Southern  wing  of  his  party 
he  was  elected,  though  the  anti-slavery  Whigs,  Giddings,  Pal 
frey  and  Tuck  voted  against  him.  Two  years  later  he  was  again 
returned  to  Congress  and  was  again  a  candidate  for  Speaker 
and  was  again  opposed  by  the  anti-slavery  Whigs,  now  increased 
in  number  to  nine;  but  this  time  he  was  defeated  by  Howell 
Cobb  of  Georgia,  the  candidate  of  the  extreme  pro-slavery  men. 
In  July,  1850,  Winthrop  was  appointed  by  the  Governor  of 
Massachusetts  to  fill  the  vacancy  in  the  Senate  caused  by  the 
resignation  of  Daniel  Webster;  and  he  was  a  candidate  for 
the  full  term  succeeding,  but  was  defeated.  In  1851,  he  was  a 
candidate  for  Governor  and  was  again  defeated.  There  his 
political  career  ended. 

He  had  favored  the  annexation  of  Texas,  with  a  pro-slavery 
constitution,  had  voted  for  the  Mexican  war  and  had  supported 


188  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

it,  he  had  refused  to  assist  in  excluding  slavery  from  the  Ter 
ritories  and  favored  President  Taylor's  policy  of  non-interven 
tion,  he  had  approved  the  course  of  Webster  in  his  seventh  of 
March  speech  and  had  fought  the  efforts  of  the  anti-slavery 
men  of  Massachusetts  to  check  the  encroachments  of  the  slave 
power.  They  had  come  to  regard  him  as  the  leader  of  the  pro- 
slavery  influence  of  the  State  and  they  therefore  marked  him 
for  defeat.  They  triumphed  in  the  election  of  Sumner  to  the 
Senate  and  Winthrop's  official  career  ended  where  Sumner's 
began.  Sumner's  ended  with  his  death. 

Winthrop  lived  till  1894  and  maintained  his  reputation  to  the 
end  as  a  refined  and  scholarly  gentleman.  Being  an  accom 
plished  speaker,  he  was  frequently  called  upon  to  deliver  ad 
dresses  upon  commemorative  occasions.  As  a -lecturer,  he  also 
gained  a  wide  reputation  and  in  Boston  was  ranked  second  only 
to  Wendell  Phillips.  But  he  was  not,  after  1851,  known  as  a 
factor  in  politics.  He  spent  the  balance  of  his  life  devoted  to 
literature  and  scholarly  pursuits. 

In  January,  1847,  Sumner  argued  before  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Massachusetts,  an  application  for  a  discharge,  made  by  some 
volunteers,  in  a  regiment  enlisted  for  the  Mexican  war.  The 
regiment  was  organized,  upon  the  proclamation  of  the  Governor 
of  Massachusetts,  under  the  act  of  Congress  authorizing  the 
President  to  call  for  50,000  volunteers.  The  application  for 
discharge  was  made  on  behalf  of  some  minors,  who  repented 
their  too  hasty  enlistment.  It  was  based  upon  the  unconstitu 
tionally  of  the  Act  of  Congress,  and  the  question  whether  a 
minor  is  bound  by  a  contract  of  enlistment.  Sumner  argued 
earnestly,  and  especially  desired  the  court  to  hold,  that  the  act 
was  unconstitutional,  but  the  court,  while  deciding  the  case  in 
favor  of  his  clients,  placed  its  decision  upon  the  ground  of  the 
minority  of  the  applicants. 

To  give  expression  to  their  feeling  and,  if  possible,  to  enlist 
public  sentiment  with  them,  the  opposition  in  Boston  to  the 
war,  called  a  mass  meeting,  to  be  held  in  Faneuil  Hall,  on 
February  4,  1847.  They  urged  the  withdrawal  of  the  United 
States  troops  from  Mexico.  The  speakers  were  Sumner,  James 
Freeman  Clarke,  John  M.  Williams,  Theodore  Parker,  Elizur 
Wright  and  Walter  Channing.  They  were  young  men  and  some 
of  them  afterwards  became  famous.  But  the  men  who  were 
older  and  were  recognized  as  leaders  in  Boston  were  not  there. 
Some  of  them  were  pro-slavery  in  their  sympathies  and  favored 
the  war;  others  while  questioning  the  justice  of  it,  did  not  care 
to  antagonize  the  popular  enthusiasm  which  our  victorious  army 
had  aroused.  The  meeting  did  not  prove  a  very  enthusiastic 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  189 

one.  The  speakers  were  repeatedly  interrupted  by  persons  in 
the  audience,  some  recognized  as  volunteer  soldiers,  who  tried 
to  drown  their  voices.  Sumner's  speech  was  mainly  a  parallel 
between  the  condition  of  our  people  in  the  war  for  independ 
ence  and  that  of  the  Mexicans  in  the  present  war, — a  train 
of  thought  which  he  afterwards  enlarged  upon  in  some  other 
addresses. 

However  dark  the  prospect  had  so  far  seemed  to  the  friends 
of  freedom  in  Boston,  they  were  not  disposed  to  be  discouraged. 
They  had  at  least  the  consciousness  of  a  good  cause.  Their  in 
terest  in  politics  was  not  prompted  by  a  desire  for  office,  but  by 
cin  'abiding  conviction  that  slavery  was  wrong  and  a  blot  upon 
the  fame  of  their  country  that  should  be  removed.  They  there 
fore  persevered. 

On  the  5th  of  September,  1847,  Sumner  attended  the  primary 
of  the  Whigs  in  Washingtonian  Hall,  Boston,  for  the  choice 
of  delegates  to  the  State  Convention.  He  introduced  a  series 
of  resolutions  declaring  the  Mexican  war  one  of  aggression  and 
conquest  and  therefore  a  national  crime  and  rendered  more 
hateful,  as  seeking  to  extend  and  strengthen  the  slave  power; 
and  that  for  the  sake  of  the  constitution  which  it  violated  and 
the  treasure  which  it  wasted  and  the  innocent  lives  which  it 
cost,  our  troops  should  be  at  once  recalled.  They  declared 
against  the  acquisition  of  any  more  territory  and  insisted 
that  if  any  more  was  acquired,  slavery  should  be  forbidden  in 
it.  Sumner,  Charles  Francis  Adams  and  j.  S.  Eldredge  spoke 
in  favor  of  them ;  James  T.  Austin  and  William  Hayden  against 
them.  A  motion  to  lay  them  on  the  table  finally  prevailed.  It 
was  too  soon  for  the  Whigs  of  Boston  to  be  thus  frank  upon  the 
question  of  slavery.  But  the  name  of  Sumner  was  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  list  of  delegates  to  the  State  Convention  chosen  at 
the  primary. 

The  Whig  Convention  was  held  at  Springfield  on  September 
29.  Daniel  Webster  was  present  and  addressed  the  convention 
and  a  resolution  was  adopted  indorsing  and  recommending  him 
to  the  National  Convention  as  a  candidate  for  President. 
While  this  resolution  was  pending,  John  G.  Palfrey  moved  an 
amendment  to  it,  that  the  Whigs  of  Massachusetts  would  sup 
port  no  man  for  President  or  Vice-President,  who  was  not 
known  by  his  acts  and  declared  opinions  to  be  opposed  to  the 
extension  of  slavery.  Webster,  as  was  already  well  known,  was 
hedging  upon  this  question  and  seeking  for  the  vote  of  both 
wings  of  the  party.  But  this  amendment  was  not  aimed  alto 
gether  at  him.  It  was  the  outcome  of  a  conference  among  the 
anti-slavery  Whigs,  who  felt  aggrieved  at  the  Southern  mem- 


190  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

bers  of  the  party,  who  would  not  support  any  one  for  office  who 
was  not  known  to  be  favorable  to  slavery.  The  anti-slavery  men 
hoped  by  pursuing  the  same  course  to  secure  concessions  to 
themselves  or  at  least  to  show  the  futility  of  undertaking  to 
longer  unite  two  such  discordant  elements.  Palfrey,  Sumner, 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  William  Dwight  and  Charles  Allen 
spoke  in  favor  of  the  amendment  and  Winthrop  and  John  C. 
Grey  against  it.  The  amendment  was  lost. 

Sumner  closed  his  speech  to  the  convention,  full  of  earnest 
ness,  with  these  words :  te  Be  assured,  sir,  whatever  the  final  de 
termination  of  this  convention,  there  are  many  here  to-day  who 
will  never  yield  support  to  any  candidate  for  the  Presidency  or 
Vice-Presidency,  who  is  not  known  to  be  against  the  extension 
of  slavery,  even  though  he  have  freshly  received  the  sacramental 
unction  of  a  e  regular  nomination/  We  cannot  say  with  delect 
able  morality,  '  our  party  right  or  wrong '.  The  time  has  gone 
by  when  gentlemen  can  expect  to  introduce  among  us  the  disci 
pline  of  the  camp.  Loyalty  to  principle  is  higher  than  loyalty 
to  party.  The  first  is  a  heavenly  sentiment,  from  God;  the 
other  is  a  device  of  this  wrorld.  Far  above  any  flickering  light 
or  battle  lantern  of  party  is  the  everlasting  sun  of  Truth,  in 
whose  beams  are  the  duties  of  men." 

Sumner  was  disappointed  at  the  vote  of  the  convention.  It 
was  taken  late  in  the  evening,  when  the  light  in  the  hall  was  not 
good ;  and  though  the  amendment  was  declared  lost,  there  were 
some  who  questioned  the  correctness  of  the  count.  The  "  Con 
science  Whigs,"  as  the  anti-slavery  members  of  the  party  were 
now  called,  left  the  convention  dissatisfied  and  debating  what 
course  to  pursue,  some  were  for  submitting,  others  for  bolting. 
Sumner  was  for  some  months  in  correspondence  with  Thomas 
Corwin  of  Ohio,  whose  vigorous  speech  in  the  United  States 
Senate,  in  opposition  to  the  Mexican  war,  met  his  hearty  ap 
proval.  He  desired  an  organized,  independent  movement  of 
anti-slavery  men  of  all  parties  and  favored  the  nomination  of 
Corwin  for  President. 

Corwin  himself  at  first  favored  independent  action.  But  by 
October,  1847,  he  had  changed  his  mind  and  was  back  in  the 
ranks  of  the  Whig  party  to  stay  and  to  uphold  its  waning  for 
tunes  to  the  end.  He  was  growing  old  and  had  been  an  orator 
of  rare  power  and  dramatic  talent.  His  efforts  in  Congress  and 
on  the  stump  had  gathered  around  him  multitudes  of  admirers 
in  the  party.  They  had  honored  him  with  a  seat  in  Congress, 
the  Governorship  of  Ohio  and  the  seat  in  the  Senate  he  now 
occupied.  These  were  high  places;  and  he  could  not  find 
it  in  his  heart  to  break  these  associations  of  a  lifetime.  Who 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  191 

would,  now  blame  him  for  it!  He  was  afterwards  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  a  member  of  Congress  and  Minister  to 
Mexico.  It  was  left  to  younger  men,  of  fewer  political  attach 
ments  and  perhaps  of  sterner  mould,  to  bear  the  brunt  of  the 
fight  that  was  now  opening.  Sumner  regretted  the  defection  of 
Corwin  from  them,  as  well  as  the  failure  to  establish  an  anti- 
slavery  test  for  office  in  the  Whig  convention. 

It  was  left  to  the  great  parties  to  compel,  by  their  action,  a 
break  with  the  anti-slavery  forces.  The  Democrats  in  Balti 
more,  in  May,  1848,  nominated  Lewis  Cass  for  President,  who 
had  lately  by  his  vote  against  the  Wilmot  Proviso  given  satis 
factory  evidence  to  pro-slavery  men  of  his  loyalty  to  them.  The 
Whig  convention  met  in  Philadelphia,  in  June,  and  nominated 
Zachariah  Taylor,  himself  a  slaveholder  and  the  successful 
general  of  the  Mexican  war.  How  could  anti-slavery  men  con 
scientiously  vote  for  either?  Webster  had  few  votes  and  no 
chance  of  the  nomination  at  Philadelphia.  The  nomination  of 
Taylor  was  a  foregone  conclusion,  but  when  it  came  it  caused 
a  scene  in  the  convention.  Charles  Allen  and  Henry  Wilson  of 
Boston,  both  delegates,  as  soon  as  the  result  was  announced, 
arose  in  the  convention  and,  amid  great  confusion,  declared 
they  would  not  support  the  candidate.  Wilson  insisted  that 
Taylor  did  not  represent  the  sentiment  of  the  party  and  that  he 
would  do  all  he  could  to  defeat  the  ticket.  The  declaration  was 
met  by  a  storm  of  hisses,  but  it  found  some  approving  spirits,  in 
the  convention  as  well  as  out  of  it. 

That  day's  work  gave  birth  to  the  party  that  destroyed 
slavery.  The  new  movement  was  at  first  known  as  the  Free 
Soil,  and  afterwards  as  the  Republican,  Party.  The  dissatisfied 
Whigs,  anticipating  what  was  likely  to,  and  really  did  happen, 
in  the  nomination  of  Taylor  had  prepared  in  advance  a  call 
for  a  mass  convention  of  persons  of  all  parties  who  were  dis 
satisfied  with  the  nomination  of  Cass  and  Taylor  to  meet  at 
Worcester,  on  June  28,  and  take  such  action  as  the  occasion 
demanded  and  to  co-operate  with  the  other  Free  States  in  a 
convention  for  the  same  purpose.  Charles  Francis  Adams' 
name  stood  first  of  those  who  signed  this  call  and  Sumner's 
next.  Sumner  was  active  in  procuring  speakers  and  making 
preparations  for  the  convention.  As  many  as  five  thousand  per 
sons  assembled  at  Worcester  in  answer  to  the  call  and  the  City 
Hall,  where  they  had  arranged  to  meet,  being  too  small  to  ac 
commodate  them,  they  adjourned  to  the  Commons.  Samuel 
Hoar  of  Concord  was  made  chairman  and  Dr.  Howe  one  of  the 
vice-presidents,  and  Allen,  Wilson,  Joshua  E.  Giddings,  Chas. 
F.  Adams,  Sumner  and  E.  Rockwood  Hoar,  were  among  the 


192  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

speakers.  The  speakers  were  all  deeply  in  earnest  and  united 
firmly  in  renouncing  former  party  ties  and  in  favoring  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  President  and  Vice-President, 
to  represent  those  who  were  opposed  to  the  extension  of 
slavery. 

Sumner's  speech  was  short.  He  dwelt  upon  the  power  that 
the  advocates  of  slavery  had  acquired  in  our  politics.  He  re 
minded  them  that  the  great  men  of  our  Revolution  had  all 
deplored  the  evils  of  slavery  and  that  the  Constitution  had 
placed  it  where  it  was  believed  to  be  in  the  course  of  ultimate 
extinction.  But  it  had  not  been  extinguished.  'It  was  reaching 
out  for  more  territory  out  of  which  to  make  more  slave  States. 
It  was  insisting  that  it  should  be  legalized  in  places  where  it  was 
supposed  to  have  been  forever  excluded.  It  had  proposed  a  new 
test  for  office,  that  would  have  excluded  Washington,  Jefferson 
and  Franklin  from  the  public  service,  placing  its  ban  on  every 
one,  who  dared  to  pronounce  it  wrong.  It  had  lately,  he  re 
minded  them,  dictated  to  both  parties  their  nominees  for  Pres 
ident.  Sumner  especially  deplored  the  combination  which  had 
accomplished  the  nomination  of  Taylor,  "  an  unhallowed 
union — conspiracy,  let  it  be  called — between  two  remote  sec 
tions  :  between  the  politicians  of  the  Southwest  and  the  politi 
cians  of  the  Northeast — between  the  cotton  planters  and  flesh- 
mongers  of  Louisiana  and  Mississippi  and  the  cotton-spinners 
and  traffickers  of  New  England, — between  the  lords  of  the  lash 
and  the  lords  of  the  loom."  He  argued  that  the  triumph  of 
either  party  would  be  a  victory  for  slavery  and  insisted  that  the 
only  course  left  for  anti-slavery  men  was  to  nominate  a  ticket 
of  their  own  and  thus  the  slave  power  would  be  confronted  with 
the  power  of  freedom. 

"  But  it  is  said,"  he  exclaimed,  rising  to  his  full  height,  "  that 
we  shall  throw  away  our  votes  and  that  our  opposition  will  fail. 
Fail,  sir!  No  honest,  earnest  effort  in  a  good  cause  can  fail. 
It  may  not  be  crowned  with  the  applause  of  men;  it  may  not 
seem  to  touch  the  goal  of  immediate  worldly  success,  which  is 
the  end  and  aim  of  so  much  in  life.  But  it  is  not  lost.  It  helps 
to  strengthen  the  weak, — to  arm  the  irresolute  with  proper 
energy, — to  animate  all  with  devotion  to  duty,  which  in  the  end 
conquers  all.  Fail !  Did  the  martyrs  fail,  when  with  precious 
blood  they  sowed  the  seed  of  the  church  ?  Did  the  discomfited 
champions  of  Freedom  fail,  who  have  left  those  names  in  his 
tory  that  can  never  die  ?  Did  the  three  hundred  Spartans  fail, 
when  in  the  narrow  pass,  they  did  not  fear  to  brave  the  innu 
merable  Persian  hosts,  whose  very  arrows  darkened  the  sun? 
Overborne  with  numbers,  crushed  to  earth,  they  left  an  ex- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER  193 

ample  greater  far  than  any  victory.  And  this  is  the  least  we  can 
do.  Our  example  will  be  the  mainspring  of  triumph  hereafter. 
It  will  not  be  the  first  time  in  history  that  the  hosts  of  Slavery 
have  outnumbered  the  champions  of  Freedom.  But  where  is  it 
written  that  Slavery  finally  prevailed  ?  " 

The  convention  adopted  resolutions  and  an  address  to  the 
people,  and  chose  six  delegates  at  large  to  the  National  Conven 
tion,  called  to  meet  at  Buffalo  on  August  ninth.  Charles 
Francis  Adams  headed  the  list  of  these  delegates.  Delegates 
were  afterwards  chosen  to  represent  each  congressional  district. 
E.  H.  Dana  was  chosen  in  Sumner's  district,  Sumner  was  not  a 
delegate  but  concurred,  in  the  choice  of  Dana  to  represent  his 
district  and  of  Adams  as  their  State  representative.  He  was  a 
cordial  and  enthusiastic  worker  in  the  cause,  unselfish  in  his 
devotion  to  it  and  loyal  in  the  support  of  his  friends.  He,  how 
ever,  attended  the  convention  at  Buffalo  and  was  pressed  to 
speak  but  declined. 

Salmon  P.  Chase  was  the  chairman  of.  this  convention  and 
Joshua  R.  Giddings,  David  Dudley  Field,  Preston  King  and 
Samuel  J.  Tilden  were  among  the  delegates.  It  was  an  un 
usual  gathering.  It  lacked  in  large  measure,  the  place-seekers 
and  the  customary  scrambling  for  office,  while  an  unaccustomed 
religious  air  pervaded  many  of  its  meetings,  showing  that  more 
than  usual,  the  people  of  principle  and  men  who  would  repre 
sent  principle  were  there. 

Martin  Van  Buren  was  nominated  for  President  and 
Charles  Francis  Adams  for  Vice-President.  No  question  could 
be  made  of  the  sincerity  of  Adams.  But  there  was  some  doubt 
of  the  real  purpose  of  Van  Buren  in  joining  the  movement 
and  accepting  the  nomination.  He  had  already  filled  the  office 
of  President  and  had  well  earned  the  distinction  of  being  one 
of  the  shrewdest  politicians  the  country  had  produced.  This 
new  move  proved  again  his  title  to  this  distinction.  Daniel 
Webster  appreciated  the  situation,  when  he  said,  a  few  weeks 
later :  "  If  Van  Buren  and  I  were  to  find  ourselves  together 
under  the  Free-Soil  flag,  I  am  sure  that  with  his  accustomed 
good  nature,  he  would  laugh.  .  .  .  That  the  leader  of  the 
Democratic  party  should  so  suddenly  have  become  the  leader 
of  the  Free-Soil  Party  would  be  a  joke  to  shake  his  sides  and 
mine." 

But  it  was  not  altogether  a  joke  with  Van  Buren.  Cass  was 
now  the  candidate  of  the  Democratic  party, — the  party  Van 
Buren  had  so  often  guided  to  victory.  Between  Van  Buren  and 
Cass  there  was  an  old  grudge.  Cass  had  allowed  himself  to  be 
received  upon  his  return  from  the  Ministry  to  France  in  1842, 


194  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

with  great  popular  demonstrations,  as  a  candidate  for  Pres 
ident;  and  in  the  Democratic  convention  of  1844,  had  allowed 
himself  to  be  voted  for  by  the  pro-slavery  wing  of  his  party, 
who  were  seeking  to  punish  Van  Buren,  also  a  candidate,  for 
opposing  the  annexation  of  Texas,  and  who  did  accomplish  his 
defeat,  by  the  nomination  of  Polk.  Besides,  the  Van  Buren 
faction  of  the  New  York  Democracy  had  sent  a  contesting 
delegation  to  the  Baltimore  convention  that  nominated  Cass  and 
if  admitted  their  votes  could  have  defeated  him.  Afraid  to 
exclude  them  entirely,  for  New  York,  with  her  large  electoral 
vote,  could  decide  the  election, — the  convention  had  offered  to 
admit  both  delegations,  with  an  equal  division  of  the  vote.  But 
the  Barn-Burners,  as  Van  Buren's  wing  was  called,  who  repre 
sented  the  New  York  anti-slavery  Democrats,  had  spurned  this 
proffered  compromise  and  returned  to  their  homes.  The 
Hunker  wing  had  remained,  but  afraid  of  the  effect  of  their 
votes  in  the  election,  if  it  should  be  said  that  they  had  nom 
inated  Cass,  they  refrained  from  voting  and  his  nomination  was 
made  without  the  participation  of  New  York. 

The  Van  Buren  wing,  upon  their  return  home,  had  issued  a 
call  for  a  State  convention  to  be  held  at  Utica  on  the  22d  day 
of  June.  But  before  this  day  came,  the  widespread  dissatis 
faction,  with  the  candidates  of  both  parties  and  the  call  for 
the  Buffalo  convention  of  August  ninth  had  absorbed  the  atten 
tion  of  those  who  were  dissatisfied  and  all  other  movements  were 
merged  in  that.  Sumner  had  preferred  Corwin  or  Webster  as 
the  candidate  and  Judge  McLean  had  been  approached,  but  each 
after  dallying  with  the  movement,  had  drawn  away  from  it. 
But  Van  Buren,  seeing  an  opportunity  to  square  some  old 
accounts  had  expressed  his  willingness  to  stand.  He  was  sup 
ported  by  the  compact  organization  of  the  New  York  Barn 
burners  and  was  nominated.  Sumner,  frank  of  nature  him 
self,  was  ready  to  take  men  at  their  word  and  welcome  new 
recruits  to  a  good  cause  from  every  side.  He  heartily  accepted 
the  result. 

On  the  evening  of  August  twenty-second,  he  presided  at  a 
meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall  to  receive  the  report  of  the  delegates 
to  the  Buffalo  convention  and  to  ratify  the  nominations.  On 
taking  the  chair  he  made  a  brief  speech.  He  said  that  the  meet 
ing  was  in  the  interest  of  Freedom  whose  cause  was  in  danger, 
that  the  self-evident  truths  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
were  assailed  and  that  a  body  of  men  whose  principles  were  un 
known  to  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  the  slave  power,  had 
seized  the  government  and  now  controlled  both  parties,  that 
Whigs  and  Democrats  were  but  rival  factions  of  one  party — the 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  195 

slave  party,  that  at  Baltimore  the  delegations  of  the  most  im 
portant  State  of  the  Union  known  to  be  in  favor  of  the  Wilmot 
Proviso  had  been  refused  admission  to  the  convention,  while  at 
Philadelphia  the  Proviso  itself  was  stifled  amid  cries  of  "  Kick 
it  out,"  that  Cass  was  nominated  at  Baltimore,,  pledged  against 
its  whole  principle,  while  at  Philadelphia,  Taylor,  a  slave 
holder,  was  nominated  without  any  platform;  but  at  Buffalo 
men  of  all  parties  united  in  opposition  to  slavery.  In  speaking 
of  the  candidates,  he  said  that  some  like  himself  had  once  voted 
against  Van  Buren,  the  Democrat,  and  he  regarded  some 
portions  of  his  career  with  anything  but  satisfaction,  and  that 
others  of  those  present  had  doubtless  voted  against  Adams,  the 
•Whig,  but  that  these  differences  were  forgotten  now.  "  Time 
changes/'  he  said,  "  and  we  change  with  it.  He  has  lived  to 
little  purpose,  whose  mind  and  character  continue  through  the 
lapse  of  years,  untouched  by  these  mutations.  It  is  not  for  the 
Van  Buren  of  1838  that  we  are  to  vote,  but  for  the  Van  Buren 
of  to-day." 

Sumner  took  an  active  part  in  the  campaign,  speaking  at  the 
principal  places  in  Massachusetts,  beginning  at  Plymouth.  He 
gave  one  week  to  Maine  and,  though  he  was  invited  to  take  part 
in  the  campaign  in  other  States  and  to  speak  in  New  York, 
Philadelphia  and  Brooklyn,  he  declined.  His  speech  ordinarily 
occupied  three  hours  in  the  delivery  and  though  it  was  some 
times  past  midnight  when  he  closed,  he  kept  the  attention  of 
his  hearers  to  the  end.  Contemporary  chroniclers  are  uniform 
in  their  testimony  of  the  beauty  and  winning  power  of  the 
speech.  Though  his  cause  was  not  popular,  in  the  twenty-eight 
places  that  he  spoke  in  Massachusetts,  he  was  never  rudely  in 
terrupted,  but  once,  and  this  was  at  Cambridge,  the  scene  of  so 
many  pleasant  associations  of  his  youth,  where  a  considerable 
sprinkling  of  students  from  the  South  and  from  the  aristocratic 
and  conservative  families  of  Boston,  reflected  their  home  sen 
timents.  Here  he  was  interrupted  with  some  yells  and  hisses. 
But  he  met  them  promptly  and  by  singling  out  and  shaming  the 
ringleaders,  he  quelled  the  disturbance.  The  sounds  grated 
harshly  on  the  refined  and  sensitive  ears  of  Longfellow,  who 
was  present  and  thought  he  saw  the  loss  of  Sumner  to  the 
literary  career  he  had  coveted  for  him. 

Others  saw  it  differently.  To  them  it  was  the  appearance  of 
a  new  man,  in  the  political  arena,  representing  a  new  party. 
He  was  estimated  to  be  the  ablest  speaker  of  his  party  and 
widened  his  fame  as  an  orator.  His  addresses  so  far  had  been 
before  colleges  or  societies  for  the  promotion  of  some  reform, 
or  in  lecture  lyceums,  where  privileged  classes  of  superior 


196  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

culture  had  heard  him.  But  now  he  came  before  the  plain 
people  of  his  State.  Others,  perhaps,  like  Charles  Allen,  who 
was  elected  to  Congress  from  the  Worcester  district,  drew  larger 
numbers  of  converts  to  the  cause.  This  was  owing  to  the  re 
moteness  of  the  influence  of  Webster  and  of  aristocratic  Boston, 
where  party  lines  were  more  sharply  drawn.  And  something 
must  be  granted  to  Sumner  even  in  Worcester,  for  he  spoke 
there  in  the  convention  and  in  the  campaign.  But  by  common 
consent  he  drew  the  most  admiration  and  won  the  first  place  in 
the  estimation  of  his  party. 

In  October  Sumner  was  nominated  for  Congress  in  the  First 
Massachusetts  district.  He  was  not  present  at  the  convention, 
but  had  authorized  a  delegate,  if  his  name  was  mentioned  as  a 
candidate,  to  publicly  announce  his  declination  to  accept  any 
political  office.  Notwithstanding,  he  was  nominated  by  ac 
clamation  and  the  committee  in  notifying  him  of  it,  urged  that 
a  political  crisis  had  come  which  called  upon  every  man  to 
forego  his  personal  wishes.  He  accepted  the  nomination  in  a 
letter  dated  October  26,  1848.  Referring  to  his  own  wish  he 
said : 

"  The  member  of  the  convention  who  spoke  for  me,  at  my 
special  request,  did  not  go  beyond  the  truth.  I  have  never  held 
political  office  of  any  kind,  nor  have  I  ever  been  a  candidate 
for  any  such  office.  It  has  been  my  desire  and  determination 
to  labor  in  such  fields  of  usefulness  as  are  open  to  every  private 
citizen,  without  the  honor,  emoluments  or  constraint  of  office/' 
^"  You  now  bid  me  renounce  the  cherished  idea  of  my  life, 
early  formed  and  strengthened  by  daily  experience,  especially 
by  circumstances  at  the  present  moment.  In  support  of  this 
request  you  suggest  that  a  political  crisis  has  come  which  calls 
upon  every  man  to  forego  his  personal  wishes.  Upon  serious 
deliberation,  anxious  to  perform  my  duty,  I  feel  myself  unable 
to  resist  this  appeal.  In  my  view  a  crisis  has  arrived,  which 
requires  the  best  efforts  of  every  citizen,  nor  should  he  hesitate 
with  regard  to  his  peculiar  post.  Happy  to  serve  in  the  cause 
he  should  shrink  from  no  labor  and  no  exposure." 

The  Presidential  election  took  place  on  November  seventh. 
In  Massachusetts,  Taylor  had  61,072  votes;  Van  Buren  38,133 
and  Cass  35,284.  By  dividing  the  Democratic  vote,  the  Free- 
Soil  party  had  made  Taylor's  success  easy.  In  New  York 
where  the  electoral  vote  was  much  larger  and  the  issue  conse 
quently  much  more  important,  the  same  result  was  brought 
about.'  Taylor  had  218,603  votes;  Van  Buren  120,510  and 
Cass  114,318.  The  vote  of  New  York  controlled  the  election 
and  Taylor  won.  The  Whigs  of  that  State,  both  pro-  and  anti- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  197 

slavery,  mistrusted  Van  Buren.  They  had  fought  too  many 
battles  with  him  to  be  easily  cajoled.  William  H.  Seward,  who 
possessed  the  unbounded  confidence  of  the  anti-slavery  men, 
on  the  stump,  seconded  by  Horace  Greeley,  in  the  editorial 
chair,  with  Thurlow  Weed  to  organize  the  campaign,  made  a 
combination  perhaps  never  equalled;  and  they  fought  a  most 
earnest  fight  for  General  Taylor.  But  while  Van  Buren,  as  he 
was  shrewd  enough  to  anticipate,  could  get  few  Whig  votes,  he 
hopelessly  divided  his  old  companions  in  victory,  the  Demo 
crats,  defeated  Cass  and  squared  one  of  his  political  accounts. 
He  was  then  ready  to  return  to  his  first  love  and  ever  after,  to 
the  day  of  his  death,  in  1862,  continued  a  consistent  Democrat. 

The  election  in  Massachusetts  for  State  officers  and  members 
of  Congress  took  place  the  week  after  the  Presidential  election. 
Little  time  remained  for  farther  work.  Sumner  had  been  made 
chairman  of  the  State  Committee  of  the  Free-Soil  party.  Two 
days  after  the  Presidential  election  he  prepared,  and  the  com 
mittee  adopted,  an  address  to  the  voters  of  the  State.  After 
congratulating  them  upon  the  fact  that  almost  40,000  had  de 
clared  their  adhesion  to  their  party  and  that  they  were  not  now 
the  third  party,  he  urged  them  in  the  next  election,  by  greater 
efforts,  to  make  themselves  the  first.  "  Ours  is  the  cause  of 
truth,  of  morals,  of  religion,  of  God.  Let  us,"  he  wrote,  "  be 
united  in  its  support !  '  A  stout  heart,  a  clear  conscience,  and 
never  despair/  These  were  the  last  words  addressed  in  writing 
by  John  Quincy  Adams  to  a  person  deeply  interested  in  our 
movement.'5  The  address  urged  them  to  apply  these  words  to 
themselves.  It  was  signed  by  Sumner  as  chairman,  and  by  the 
other  members  of  the  committee ;  and  it  is  interesting  to  note 
among  the  names  of  these  members  of  the  committee,  then 
mere  politicians  for  the  sake  of  principle;  J.  A.  Andrews, 
afterwards  War  Governor  of  Massachusetts;  John  G.  Whittier,' 
the  poet;  E.  Rockwood  Hoar,  later  a  Congressman;  and  Amasa 
Walker,  the  Political  Economist. 

Sumner's  nomination  for  Congress  had  been,  as  he  himself 
expressed  it,  "like  a  forlorn  hope."  The  party  had  been  or 
ganized  only  six  months  before  the  election.  Until  the  Presi 
dential  election,  the  estimate  of  the  vote  it  would  poll  could  be 
little  better  than  conjecture.  The  large  vote  it  received,  with 
the  older  politicians  and  political  speakers  working  against  it, 
with  their  compact  organizations,  and  only  the  younger  men 
in  its  favor,  and  they  little  known  to  fame  or  influence,  showed 
how  strong  a  dislike  there  was  among  the  plain  people  to  the 
principles  and  bullying  attitude  of  the  slave  power.  In  the  two 
great  States  of  New  York  and  Massachusetts,  it  had  a  larger 


198          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

vote  than  the  Democratic  party.  In  Simmer's  district,  it  poled 
at  the  Presidential  election  1,909  votes  as  against  8,427  for 
Taylor  and  2,997  for  Cass.  This  was  in  conservative  Boston. 
But  in  the  week  following,  these  figures  were  materially 
changed.  At  the  Congressional  election  then  held,  Sumner 
increased  the  vote  of  his  party  from  1,909  to  2,336,  a  fact 
which  showed  something  for  his  personal  influence  and  popu 
larity.  Winthrop  had  7,726  and  Hallett  1,460.  Winthrop  was 
elected ;  but  Sumner  was  second. 

The  election  of  1848  had  a  great  influence  upon  the  political 
fortunes  of  the  country.  Prior  to  that  time,  there  had  been  a 
great  deal  of  discussion  of  the  slavery  question,  both  in  Congress 
and  before  the  people.  Many  good  people  had  deplored  the 
existence  of  slavery  and  by  constant  agitation  had  done  what 
they  could  to  arouse  public  sentiment  against  it.  But  till  now 
there  had  been  no  organized  political  movement  against  it,  no 
independent  effort,  when  the  people  were  squarely  appealed  to, 
by  their  votes  to  curb  its  power.  Always  before,  this  feeling  of 
opposition  had  been  hushed  up  with  threats  of  disunion,  or  so 
complicated  with  other  issues  that  the  anti-slavery  question 
was  hardly  recognizable.  But  now,  for  once,  Freedom  had  ob 
tained  a  hearing  and  the  people  had  spoken  with  emphasis,  and 
it  was  found  how  considerable  a  number  of  voters  was  ready  to 
join  a  party  under  this  battle-cry  alone.  Its  success  gave  a 
bolder  tone  to  its  voice  and  confidence  to  its  advocates.  Hence 
forward  it  was  to  be  a  distinct  force  in  politics,  becoming  con 
stantly  more  powerful  till  it  finally  triumphed. 

For  Sumner  the  influence  of  the  election  was  no  less  decisive. 
He  could  be  fairly  said  to  have  earned  the  title  of  leader  of  the 
party  in  Massachusetts.  True,  there  was  Charles  Francis 
Adams,  who  had  been  the  candidate  for  Vice-President  on  the 
ticket  with  Yan  Buren.  But  he  was  the  editor  of  The  Daily 
Whig,  and  his  duties  had  confined  him  to  his  paper.  And  there 
was  Charles  Allen,  of  Worcester,  who  had  been  carried  into 
Congress  on  the  top  wave  of  the  movement.  But  Sumner's 
fame  as  a  speaker  had  outreached  all  the  others.  And  his  chair 
manship  of  the  committee  had  brought  him  into  prominence 
and  into  intimate  relations  with  the  workers  of  the  party.  The 
people  liked  the  fearlessness,  the  earnestness,  the  absence  of 
self-seeking  and  the  high  moral  tone  of  the  man.  The  move 
ment  was  partly  a  rebellion  against  the  leadership  of  men  in 
politics,  who,  in  their  care  for  themselves  and  the  offices  gave  too 
little  heed  to  the  needs  of  their  constituents  and  the  rights  of 
humanity.  Sumner  was  more  according  to  their  ideal  than  the 
men  they  had  been  supporting  for  high  places. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  199 

He  was  honest.  This  was  the  tower  of  his  strength.  He 
made  it  the  rule  of  his  life  to  see  where  the  right  lay  and  then 
pursue  it.  And  he  voiced  the  sentiment  of  many  good  people 
when  he  wrote  on  July  6,  1849:  "The  National  Government 
has  been  for  a  long  time  controlled  by  Slavery.  It  must  be 
emancipated  immediately."  He  hailed  the  promise  now  of  a 
North  which  would  spurn  the  "  mockery  of  a  Republic  with 
professions  of  Freedom  on  its  lips,  while  the  chains  of  slavery 
clanked  in  the  Capitol." 

As  chairman  of  the  State  Committee  of  the  Free-Soil  party, 
Sumner  called  the  State  Convention  to  order  in  Worcester  on 
September  12,  1849.  He  had  arranged  for  speakers  to  address 
the  convention.  Among  them  were  Charles  Francis  Adams, 
Charles  Allen,  Anson  Burlingame  and  Edward  L.  Keyes. 
Stephen  C.  Phillips,  of  Salem,  was  nominated  for  Governor. 
He  was  a  wealthy  merchant  who  had  previously  been  a  Whig 
and  had  been  sent  by  his  party  to  Congress.  John  Mills,  for 
merly  a  Democrat,  of  Springfield,  was  nominated  for  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor.  Sumner  was  made  chairman  of  a  committee  to 
report  an  address  and  resolutions,  to  be  published  to  the  people 
of  the  State,  setting  forth  the  principles  and  purposes  of  the 
party.  The  committee  was  composed  of  one  member  from  each 
county  of  the  State.  John  G.  Whittier  was  the  member  from 
Essex. 

Sumner  prepared  the  address  and  read  it  to  the  convention. 
It  occupied  more  than  an  hour  in  the  reading.  It  was  an 
elaborate  and  carefully  prepared  vindication  of  the  principles 
of  the  Free-Soil  party.  It  insisted  that  the  old  political  issues 
of  the  Bank,  the  Sub-treasury,  the  Public  Lands  and  even  the 
Tariff  were  all  obsolete.  Quoting  from  both  Clay  and  Polk, 
the  leaders  of  their  respective  parties,  he  showed  that  both 
Whigs  and  Democrats  occupied  the  same  ground  upon  the 
Tariff  and  that  Webster  for  the  Whigs,  and  Walker  for  the 
Democrats,  were  both  pleading  for  its  withdrawal  from  the  list 
of  issues,  so  that  the  industries  of  the  country  might  not  further 
suffer  from  the  uncertainty  caused  by  its  discussion;  that  the 
great  issue  now  was,  Are  you  for  Freedom  or  are  you  for 
Slavery?  He  regretted  that  we  had  drifted  away  from  the 
sentiment  of  the  great  men  who  had  achieved  our  independence 
and  organized  our  government,  and  that  from  being  anti- 
slavery  we  had  now  become  a  ^pro-slavery  nation.  The  address 
then  enumerated  the  usurpations  of  the  slave  power : 

The  Slave  States  were  far  inferior  to  the  Free  States,  in 
population,  wealth,  education,  libraries  and  resources  of  all 
kinds,  and  yet  they  had  taken  to  themselves  the  lion's  share  of 


200          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

honor  and  profit  under  the  Constitution.  They  had  held  the 
Presidency  for  fifty-seven  years,  while  the  Free  States  had 
held  it  for  twelve  only. 

Early  in  the  century,  when  the  District  of  Columbia  was 
occupied  as  a  National  Capital,  the  slave  power  succeeded  in 
defiance  of  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution  and  even  of  the  express 
words  of  one  of  its  amendments,  in  securing  for  slavery,  within 
the  district  the  countenance  of  the  government.  Until  then 
slavery  existed  nowhere  on  land  within  the  exclusive  jurisdic 
tion  of  the  nation. 

It  secured  for  slavery  another  recognition  in  the  Territory 
of  Louisiana,  purchased  from  France. 

It  placed  slavery  under  the  sanction  of  the  government  in 
the  Territory  of  Florida,  purchased  from  Spain. 

It  was  able,  after  a  severe  struggle,  to  compel  the  government 
to  receive  Missouri  into  the  Union  with  a  pro-slavery  con 
stitution. 

It  instigated  and  carried  on  a  war  in  Florida,  mainly  to 
recover  fugitive  slaves. 

It  wrested  Texas  from  Mexico  to  extend  slavery  and  finally 
secured  its  admission  as  a  State  with  a  constitution  making 
slavery  perpetual. 

It  next  plunged  the  country  into  a  war  with  Mexico  to  gain 
new  lands  for  slavery. 

It  compelled  the  government  to  refuse  to  acknowledge  the 
republic  of  Hayti,  where  slaves  had  become  freemen  and  had 
established  an  independent  nation. 

It  compelled  the  government  to  stoop  before  the  British 
queen  to  secure  compensation  for  slaves  who  had  asserted  and 
achieved  their  freedom  on  the  Atlantic  Ocean  and  afterwards 
sought  shelter  in  Bermuda. 

It  compelled  the  government  to  seek  the  negotiation  of 
treaties  for  the  surrender  of  fugitive  slaves. 

It  joined  in  declaring  the  foreign  slave  trade  piracy,  but  in 
sisted  upon  legalizing  the  coast-wise  slave  trade. 

It  had  rejected  for  years  petitions  to  Congress  against 
slavery,  thus  denying  the  right  to  petition. 

It  had  imprisoned  and  sold  into  slavery  colored  citizens  of 
Massachusetts. 

It  had  insulted  and  exiled,  from  Charleston  and  New  Or 
leans,  the  representatives  of  Massachusetts,  who  were  sent  to 
those  places  as  commissioners  of  the  State  to  protect  her  colored 
citizens. 

In  the  formal  dispatches  of  John  C.  Calhoun,  as  Secretary 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  201 

of  State,  it  had  made  the  Eepublic  appear  as  the  vindicator  of 
slavery. 

It  had  put  forth  the  doctrine  that  slavery  could  go  to  all 
newly  acquired  territories  and  have  the  protection  of  the  flag. 

In  defiance  of  the  declared  desire  of  the  Fathers  to  gradually 
extinguish  slavery,  it  had  successively  introduced  into  the 
Union,  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  Louisiana,  Mississippi,  Alabama, 
Missouri,  Arkansas,  Florida  and  Texas  as  slaveholding  States 
to  fortify  its  political  power  and  make  the  government  lend  it 
new  sanction. 

By  such  steps,  he  argued,  the  national  government  had  been 
perverted  from  its  original  purposes,  its  character  changed  and 
its  power  subjected  to  slavery.  This  should  not  have  been  per 
mitted  to  befall  a  government  nursed  by  Freedom  into  strength 
and  quickened  by  her  into  those  activities  which  are  the  highest 
glory  of  a  nation. 

The  Address  then  asked  the  question,  Shall  slavery  be  ex 
tended  into  the  territories  of  California  and  New  Mexico  and 
they  be  admitted  as  slave  States  ?  It  insisted  that  a  direct  pro 
hibition  by  law  was  necessary  to  prevent  this.  It  defined  the 
.position  of  the  Free-Soil  party  towards  these  accumulated  and 
threatened  aggressions — that  it  was  pledged  to  the  prohibition 
of  slavery  in  the  Territories  and  wherever  else  the  national 
government  was  responsible  for  it,  that  the  District  of  Colum 
bia  was  national  territory  and  must  be  cleared  of  it,  that  the 
nation  must  be  made  to  stand  openly,  actively  and  perpetually 
on  the  side  of  freedom  and  that  while  it  might  have  no  power 
to  abolish  it  in  the  States  where  it  already  existed  it  should 
be  made  to  step  to  the  very  verge  of  its  authority  in  this  direc 
tion.  This,  with  cheap  postage,  the  Address  added,  and  an 
economical  administration  of  the  government,  abolishing  un 
necessary  officers  and  electing  the  others,  as  far  as  practicable, 
by  the  people,  the  improvement  of  our  rivers  and  harbors  and 
free  public  lands,  enough  for  homes  for  actual  settlers,  were 
the  principles  of  the  Free-Soil  party. 

The  Address  was  violently  attacked  by  the  Daily  Atlas  and 
other  Whig  papers  of  the  State.  In  one  issue  the  Atlas  ques 
tioned  a  statement  of  the  Address  that  Washington  had  de 
clared  his  sympathy  with  the  work  of  the  Anti-slavery  Societies 
and  that  in  any  movement  for  the  abolition  of  slavery  his  vote 
should  not  be  wanting.  Sumner,  then  in  New  York,  wrote  in 
reply  to  the  denial  of  the  truthfulness  of  these  statements,  an 
open  letter,  quoting  numerous  writings  of  Washington  to  sus 
tain  his  position.  The  attitude  of  the  press  towards  the  Free- 
Soil  party  and  its  advocates  had  been  peculiarly  personal.  The 


2Q2  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

increasing  circulation  of  the  Whig,  the  anti-slavery  organ, 
edited  by  Charles  Francis  Adams,  which  Sumner  had  assisted 
in  establishing  and  to  whose  columns  he  was  a  frequent  con 
tributor,  was  disturbing  the  older  papers,  as  the  large  vote  of 
the  Free-Soil  party  was  disturbing  the  Whig  politicians.  They 
referred  to  Sumner,  Adams  and  Palfrey  as  "  The  Mutual 
Admiration  Society,"  "  Charles  Sumner  &  Co."  Sumner  they 
called  "  a  transcendental  lawyer/'  Palfrey  was  "  Judas," 
Adams,  "  a  political  huckster,"  etc.  This  bitterness  of  the 
Whigs  naturally  made  political  combinations  between  the  Free- 
Soilers  and  Democrats  easy. 

The  State  was  Whig  in  politics.  This  party  had,  therefore, 
everything  to  lose  by  a  change  in  party  lines,  as  then  existing. 
The  Democrats,  on  the  contrary,  had  everything  to  gain  and 
hence  were  willing  to  let  events  take  their  course  and  even  help 
along  dissensions  among  the  Whigs.  In  the  election  of  1849 
therefore,  the  most  important  feature  was  the  combination 
made  between  the  Free-Soilers  and  Democrats.  They  elected, 
in  this  way,  thirteen  Senators  and  one  hundred  and  thirty- 
Representatives,  in  the  State.  The  Free-Soil  vote  of  the  previ 
ous  year  had  been  kept  well  up  and  the  results  secured  were 
suggesting  to  thoughtful  men  that  these  combinations  could 
be  made  useful  in  the  future. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

FRIENDS  DROPPING  AWAY — THE  CAUSE — EFFECT  ON  SUMNER — 
NATHAN  APPLETON,  ABBOT  LAWRENCE,  THE  TICKNORS 
GONE — BUT  NOT  LONGFELLOW,  HOWE,  BANCROFT,  PRES- 

COTT,  KENT NEW  FRIENDS 

i 

THE  years  from  1845  to  1850  were  eventful  ones  in  the 
private  life  of  Sirmner.  Judge  Story  was  dead  and  with  him 
was  gone  one  of  the  strongest  ties  that  bound  Sumner  to  Har 
vard  and  the  quiet  student  life  of  his  youth  and  early  man 
hood.  Professor  Greenleaf  was  in  failing  health.  He  resigned 
his  professorship  in  1848  and  died  in  1853.  Their  places  in 
the  Law  School  were  filled.  The  old,  familiar  faces  about  the 
college  were  disappearing  and  new  ones  were  taking  their 
places.  Sumner  felt  the  distance  between  him  and  Cambridge 
increasing. 

The  friends  of  his  own  age  were  changing  also.  Their  paths 
were  diverging.  Most  of  them  were  not  interested  in  slavery 
and  were  not  willing  to  go  to  the  lengths  upon  this  subject  that 
he  went.  They  thought  him  extravagant  and  visionary,  in  his 
views.  He  was  too  much  of  an  idealist  for  their  practical  eyes. 
The  subject  which  occupied  so  much  of  his  time  and  thoughts 
was  distasteful  to  them,  slavery  was  unpopular  in  the  circles 
where  they  moved  and  they  did  not  wish  to  be  compromised 
with  it.  It  was  far  away  from  them,  out  of  their  sight  and 
they  knew  little  and  cared  less  about  it,  while  the  good  will  of 
their  own  community  brought  bread  and  butter  to  them  and 
their  families  and  was  much  more  important. 

Sumner's  controversy  with  Winthrop  about  his  vote  on  the 
Mexican  war  bill  has  already  been  mentioned.  It  alienated 
many  of  his  friends.  He  and  Winthrop,  being  young  men,  of 
about  the  same  age,  always  living  in  Boston  and  educated 
together,  had  many  mutual  friends.  But  Winthrop  had  the 
advantage  of  Sumner,  in  this :  he  was  the  member  of  Congress 
and  controlled  the  appointments  to  the  Federal  offices  in  his 
district.  This  naturally  attached  a  wide  circle  to  his  interest. 
Sumner  had  no  political  prestige,  except  such  as  in  a  private 
station,  his  talents  gave  him.  The  controversy  in  the  papers 
was  long  and  acrimonious  and  was  renewed  in  their  speeches. 
On  the  part  of  Winthrop  it  became  personal.  Sumner  was  care- 
SOS 


204          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ful  not  to  allow  it  to  be  so  on  his  part.  He  wrote  his  brother 
George,  still  in  Europe,  that  if  he  met  Winthrop,  who  was  ex 
pected  in  Paris,  he  should  not  allow  it  to  make  any  difference  in 
his  treatment  of  him,  that  he  had  no  feeling  towards  Winthrop 
personally,  but  of  kindness,  and  would  not  if  it  were  otherwise, 
wish  his  relatives  to  take  up  his  controversy. 

John  Quincy  Adams  died  in  Washington  during  the  progress 
of  the  controversy.  When  the  aged  statesman  was  stricken 
with  paralysis  in  his  seat  in  the  House,  Winthrop  being  Speaker, 
had  him  carried  to  the  Speaker's  room,  where  he  lay  till  he 
died,  two  days  later.  With  his  abounding  courtesy,  Winthrop 
was  unremitting  in  his  care  of  him  and  offered  many  civilities 
during  the  progress  of  the  funeral  to  the  friends.  Charles 
Francis  Adams,  the  son,  could  not  forget  this.  He  had  till 
then  been  the  editor  of  The  Whig  and  had  written  some 
caustic  criticisms  of  Winthrop's  vote,  but  touched  with  this 
kindness  and  occupied  with  the  settlement  of  his  father's  affairs, 
he  felt  he  could  no  longer  take  part  in  the  controversy  and 
soon  gave  up  the  management  of  the  paper.  During  the 
interval  between  his  father's  death  and  his  retirement  from 
The  Whig,  some  two  months,  Sumner  edited  the  paper.  He 
was  urged  to  become  the  permanent  editor^  but  declined. 

Palfrey  and  Howe,  who  had  taken  some  part  in  the  criticism 
of  Winthrop,  had  long  before  disappeared  from  the  controversy, 
and  on  the  retirement  of  Adams,  Sumner  was  left  alone  to  end 
it  and  to  inherit  the  accumulated  ill-will  reserved  for  the  last 
champion  of  the  fight.  Having  entered  it  reluctantly  and  only 
after  it  had  been  commenced  by  others,  and  upon  their  solicita 
tion,  he  had  received  more  than  his  share  of  the  ill-feeling  it 
engendered. 

When  later  he  went  into  the  movement  to  organize  the  Free- 
Soil  party  and  appeared  upon  the  stump,  championing  its  cause 
with  all  the  earnestness  he  did,  he  touched  Boston  society  at 
another  tender  point.  He  was  striking  at  the  success  of  the 
Whig  party  and  around  it  gathered  much  in  which  Boston  took 
a  just  pride.  The  massive  eloquence  of  Daniel  Webster  and 
his  great  career  as  a  statesman ;  the  more  ornate,  if  less  power 
ful  oratory  of  Choate  and  Winthrop  and  Everett ;  the  charming 
society  of  George  Ticknor  and  his  accomplished  wife  (he  had 
been  Minister  to  Spain)  ;  the  accumulated  capital  of  the  Boston 
merchants  and  manufacturers  in  their  commerce  with  the  cot 
ton  planters  of  the  South;  the  youth  and  beauty,  the  best 
society  and  the  pleasantest  homes,  for  a  quarter  of  a  century, 
had  gathered  about  the  Whig  party.  It  had  given  offices  and 
honors  to  her  citizens.  There  is  no  surer  way  to  cause  a  separa- 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  205 

tion  of  pleasant  lifetime  acquaintances  than  to  join  and  persis 
tently  advocate  a  new  political  party,  hostile  to  one  that  has 
long  held  sway  in  a  community.  Sumner  had  dared  to  do  this 
and  he  encountered  the  customary  storm. 

He  did  it  fully  realizing  the  consequence  to  himself.  "  I  do 
not  say  that  I  can,"  he  wrote  his  brother  George,  "but  I  do 
strive  in  what  I  do,  to  think  as  little  as  possible  of  what  others 
may  think  of  it  and  of  its  influence  on  my  personal  affairs.  In 
such  a  mood,  criticism  unfavorable  and  hostile,  neglect  and 
disfavor,  lose  something  of  their  sting.  What  is  it  to  an  earnest 
laborer,  whether  one  or  ten  societies  recognize  him  by  their 
parchment  fraternization,  or  whether  reviews  frown  or  smile? 
And  yet  it  cannot  be  disguised  that  praise  from  the  worthy  is 
most  pleasant  and  that  all  tokens  of  kindly  recognition  are  valu 
able.  But  it  is  not  for  these  that  we  live  and  labor." 

And  a  little  later,  just  after  the  election  of  1848,  he  wrote 
George  again :  "  You  will  see  that  the  Free-Soil  party  comes  out 
second  best;  it  is  no  longer  the  third  party.  I  have  spoken  a 
great  deal,  usually  to  large  audiences  and  with  a  certain  effect. 
As  a  necessary  consequence  I  have  been  a  mark  for  abuse.  I 
have  been  attacked  bitterly;  but  I  have  consoled  myself  with 
what  John  Quincy  Adams  said  to  me  during  the  last  year  of  his 
life :  '  No  man  is  abused  whose  influence  is  not  felt.' '; 

But  strive  against  it  as  he  would,  Sumner  realized  his  isola 
tion.  He  had  no  wife  and  no  children  to  occupy  his  thoughts 
or  afford  him  relaxation.  His  home  was  with  his  mother,  who 
was  growing  old  and  lived  very  quietly.  It  was  not  convenient 
for  him  to  entertain  his  friends  there.  In  the  years  following 
his  return  from  Europe,  he  had  been  a  general  favorite  and 
was  much  sought  for  in  society,  and  with  his  social  disposition 
he  had  become  accustomed  to  pleasure  and  relaxation.  He  was 
fitted  to  be  a  good  fellow,  was  not  ascetic  in  his  tastes,  enjoyed 
good  fare  and  was  not  averse  to  a  glass  of  wine.  He  was  a 
good  talker  and  having  travelled  much  and  read  more  could 
sustain  his  part  in  company.  To  feel  that  he  was  cut  off  from 
many  of  the  homes  where  he  had  been  so  welcome  before,  bore 
heavily  upon  his  sensitive  nature.  Riding  one  day  in  a  car 
riage  with  Richard  H.  Dana,  Jr.,  down  Beacon  Street,  one  of 
the  centres  of  Boston's  best  social  life,  he  said  sadly :  "  The 
time  was  when  there  was  hardly  a  home  within  two  miles  of 
this  place,  at  which  I  was  not  a  welcome  guest.  Now  hardly 
one  is  open  to  me."  Dana,  too,  had  felt  the  burden  of  social 
ostracism,  but  being  surrounded  by  an  interesting  family,  it 
bore  less  heavily  upon  him. 

The  "  Five  of  Clubs  "  was  now  little  more  than  a  memory. 


206  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Cleveland  having  died  in  1843,  Howe  had  taken  his  place,  but 
its  members,  save  Sumner,  were  all  married  and  had  families. 
They  had  no  regular  meetings.  Each  was  absorbed  with  his 
own  work;  Howe  with  the  Asylum  for  the  Blind,  Felton  and 
Longfellow  with  their  professorships.  Hillard  and  Sumner  oc 
cupied  offices  together  at  Number  Four,  Court  Street;  but 
there  was  a  want  of  the  old  cordiality  between  them.  Hillard 
had  come  under  the  influence  of  the  Ticknors.  But  there  had 
been  no  break.  When  he  went  to  Europe,  in  1847,  he  left 
his  will  with  Sumner  and  wrote  him  an  affectionate  farewell,  in 
which  he  referred  to  their  happy  relations  of  other  years  and 
admitting  they  had  not  been  so  cordial  of  late  and  had  differed 
in  politics,  he  begged  Sumner  not  to  remember  it  unkindly,  that 
he  had  been  subjected  to  other  influences  and,  at  most,  it  was 
only  an  honest  difference  of  opinions,  to  which  each  was  en 
titled.  "  I  have  never  loved  you  the  less,"  he  added,  and  *  *  * 
"  I  write  these  words  for  you  to  think  upon  in  case  we  should 
never  meet  again."  But -upon  his  return  Hillard  took  other 
offices.  Sumner  and  Felton  differed  radically.  Felton  did  not 
undertake  to  conceal  his  disapproval  of  Simmer's  course  in 
politics;  and  they  parted. 

One  of  the  houses  where  Sumner  had  long  been  intimate 
was  that  of  Nathan  Appleton,  a  distant  connection  by  mar 
riage. 

He  was  a  wealthy  merchant,  the  father-in-law  of  Longfellow, 
had  repeatedly  represented  Boston  in  Congress  and  was  a  man 
of  considerable  influence.  But  he  was  an  uncompromising 
Whig  and  ready  to  follow  where  his  party  led.  He  had  been  a 
loyal  friend  of  Sumner  till  his  controversy  with  Winthrop,  but 
took  offense  at  that  and  again  at  the  statement  in  Sumner's 
speech  at  the  organization  of  the  Free-Soil  party  in  Worcester 
in  1848,  that  Taylor's  nomination  had  been  the  result  of  a 
conspiracy  between  the  lords  of  the  lash  of  Louisiana  and  the 
lords  of  the  loom  of  New  England.  Seeing  the  drift  of  Sum- 
ner's  course  in  the  controversy  with  Winthrop  and  before,  he 
had  at  first  sought  to  win  him  back.  "  I  have  regretted/'  he 
wrote,  "  your  course  the  last  two  years  but  more  in  sorrow  than 
in  anger.  I  have  regretted  to  see  talents  so  brilliant  as  yours 
and  from  which  I  had  hoped  so  much  for  our  country,  take  a 
course  in  which  I  consider  them  worse  than  thrown  away."  But 
after  the  Worcester  speech,  considering  the  reference  to  the 
"  lords  of  the  loom  "  to  be  partly  to  himself,  he  desired  a  retrac 
tion  of  it.  He  called  upon  Sumner  to  produce  the  proof  to 
sustain  such  a  charge ;  and  he  did.  An  acrimonious  letter  from 
'Mr.  Appleton  followed,  which  terminated  their  friendship. 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  207 

In  defending  the  language  of  the  Worcester  speech,  Sumner 
had  referred  to  a  conversation  with  Abbot  Lawrence,  at  his 
house,  before  the  Philadelphia  convention,  in  which  Mr.  Law 
rence  had  expressed  himself  to  him  as  favorable  to  Taylor's 
nomination  and  had  said  that  he  did  not  think  Webster  could  be 
nominated,  or,  if  nominated,  could  be  elected  and  had  named 
other  prominent  Massachusetts  Whigs,  among  them  Nathan 
Appleton,  who  were  of  the  same  opinion;  and  that  Mr.  Law 
rence  had  permitted  and  promoted  the  use  of  his  name  as  a 
candidate  for  Vice-President  on  the  ticket  with  Taylor,  and  all 
the  while  Webster  was  being  held  up  as  the  candidate  of  the 
State  for  the  nomination  for  President.  During  the  campaign, 
Sumner  had  also  made  use  in  his  speeches  of  a  letter  of  Law 
rence,  who  was  a  prominent  manufacturer,  another  of  the 
"  lords  of  the  loom  "  to  prove  that  the  tariff  was  not  the  cause  of 
the  existing  depression  in  business.  Lawrence  had  authorized 
The  Atlas  to  say  that  Sumner  had  perverted  the  language 
of  the  letter  and  Sumner  called  upon  him  for  an  explanation. 
All  this  angered  Lawrence  and  he  wrote  him  a  caustic  letter, 
in  which,  without  undertaking  to  give  the  explanation  Sumner 
had  asked,  he  proceeded  to  condemn  Sumner's  Worcester  speech 
and  his  course  upon  the  slavery  question.  "  I  could  name,"  he 
wrote,  "  scores  and  scores  of  men  whom  you  have  honored  your 
whole  life  who  regret  and  condemn  the  course  you  have  taken/' 
And  again,  after  the  election,  to  an  overture  of  Sumner  for  a 
renewal  of  their  friendship,  he  wrote :  "  You  and  I  can  never 
meet  on  neutral  ground.  I  can  contemplate  you  only  in  the 
character  of  a  defamer  of  those  you  profess  to  love,  and  an 
enemy  to  the  permanency  of  the  TJnion." 

The  evidence  shows  that  Sumner  was  right  in  believing 
there  was  an  arrangement  among  some  of  the  Massachusetts 
Whigs  to  nominate  Lawrence  for  Vice-President  on  a  ticket 
with  Taylor  and  thus  ignore  Webster,  who  was  the  ostensible 
candidate  of  the  State.  Lawrence  was  voted  for,  and  it  was 
thought  would  have  been  nominated,  but  for  the  defection  of 
Henry  Wilson  and  Charles  Allen  of  the  Massachusetts  delega 
tion,  who,  it  will  be  remembered,  both  arose  in  the  convention, 
after  Taylor's  nomination  was  announced  and  declared  it  did 
not  represent  the  Whig  party,  and  Allen  added  that  he  would 
do  all  he  could  to  defeat  the  ticket.  So  John  Tyler  was  nomi 
nated  for  Vice-President  and  Massachusetts  got  nothing.  But 
after  the  election  Lawrence  was  made  Minister  to  England.  I 
think,  however,  in  this  sweeping  charge  of  disloyalty  to  Web 
ster  some  men,  like  Rufus  Choate  were  included  who  were  en 
tirely  innocent.  Webster  felt  his  defeat  keenly  and  the  guilty 


£08  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  BUHNER 

as  well  as  the  innocent  regretted  the  incident.  The  discussion 
of  it,  however,  was  calculated  to  produce  intense  feeling  and 
do  little  good. 

Among  others  that  it  offended  were  the  Ticknors.  They  were 
very  loyal  to  Webster  and  hesitated  to  believe  that  any  one  in 
Massachusetts  could  be  otherwise.  They  regretted  that  his  last 
days  were  to  be  embittered  by  the  thought  that  his  friends  were 
untrue  to  him.  They  were  leaders  in  the  society  of  Boston  and 
exerted  much  influence  in  determining  who  were  to  be  received 
in  their  set.  Their  loss  was  a  severe  one  to  Sumner.  George 
Ticknor  had  been  a  professor  in  Harvard,  was  the  author  of  a 
History  of  Spanish  Literature,  had  travelled  much  and  was 
wealthy.  His  wife  was  a  brilliant  woman.  Both  were  fond  of 
society  and  they  entertained  a  great  deal.  Their  home  was  the 
centre  of  the  kind  of  society  that  Sumner  enjoyed,  where  books 
and  art  and  public  men  and  measures  were  discussed  and  what 
was  refined  and  gentle  held  sway.  They  united  with  others  to 
carry  politics  into  society.  It  so  resulted  that  Sumner  was 
almost  banished  from  the  social  life  of  Boston  for  a  number  of 
years. 

Feeling  became  so  great  that  if  he  went  into  society,  he  was 
likely  to  meet  with  persons,  who  by  turning  their  backs  upon 
him,  by  cold  looks  and  slighting  remarks,  often  purposely  loud 
enough  for  him  to  hear  them,  and  by  such  other  annoj^ances, 
made  it  so  unpleasant  that  he  did  not  care  to  go  again.  The 
young  people  of  Boston  at  that  time  were  accustomed,  if  they 
danced,  or  even  if  they  did  not,  but  enjoyed  a  social  gathering, 
to  meet  at  some  public  hall  for  an  evening's  enjoyment.  But 
the  social  pressure  became  so  great  that  Sumner  gave  this  up 
too.  Even  when  his  friends  invited  him  to  smaller  and 
more  select  parties,  to  avoid  the  unpleasant  meeting  of  persons 
who  would  not  speak,  they  were  obliged  to  choose  the  company 
he  was  to  meet,  with  care. 

But  party  feeling,  warm  as  it  became,  was  not  able  to  control 
the  social  life  of  some  homes  where  Sumner  was  familiar. 
Notable  among  these  was  Longfellow's.  Though  Longfellow's 
wife  was  the  daughter  of  Nathan  Appleton,  who  had  shown  so 
much  feeling  towards  him  on  account  of  his  deflection  from 
the  beaten  path,  Sumner's  habit  of  taking  Sunday  dinner  at 
the  Craigie  House,  their  home  in  Cambridge,  going  thither 
after  church  and  remaining  for  a  social  chat  of  two  or  three 
hours,  suffered  no  interruption.  The  occupants  of  the  Craigie 
House  were  far  too  high  in  their  ideals  to  let  a  political  differ 
ence  control  their  friendships.  Sumner  continued,  as  before, 
to  take  his  European  friends,  when  in  Boston,  there  to  call; 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  209 

and  when  they  had  invited  company  that  they  knew  he  would 
enjoy,  they  did  not  hesitate  to  make  him  one  of  the  number.  ^ 
Through  all  the  years  their  friendship  continued  the  same,  till 
terminated  by  death,  and  it  impresses  us  still  as  one  of  the 
most  beautiful  friendships  in  history. 

That  with  the  Howes  continued  unbroken.  They  were  in 
complete  sympathy  writh  Sumner's  political  course.  And  at 
their  apartments  in  the  Asylum  for  the  Blind,  Julia  Ward, 
now  Mrs.  Howe,  presided  with  the  same  grace  that  had  exerted 
so  strong  a  charm  over  Sumner's  earlier  years.  There  he  found 
pleasant  society  to  which  he  was  always  one  of  the  most  wel 
come.  In  her  girlhood  she  was,  it  will  be  remembered,  one  of 
the  " Three  Graces",  and  the  sentiment  of  those  days,  when 
the  colors  of  life's  picture  were  brightest,  clung  around  her 
still  with  softening  tints  as  the  struggle  became  more  stern  and 
lonely  to  him.  She  was  an  accomplished  musician  and  her 
husband's  earlier  career  had  been  full  of  interest.  Sumner 
delighted  to  spend  an  evening  with  them  and  thus  break  the 
solitude  of  his  bachelor  life. 

The  awakening  of  Sumner's  taste  for  music  belongs  to  this 
time  of  his  life.  He  had  resorted  to  the  opera  a  good  deal  in 
earlier  years,  in  company  with  his  sister  Julia.  When  cut  off 
from  society  he  found  a  new  pleasure  in  it.  It  seemed,  as  he 
expressed  it,  as  if  he  had  found  a  new  sense.  He  went  very 
frequently  and  did  not  often  let  an  opportunity  go  unimproved 
to  hear  a  prima  donna.  He  never  became  a  musician  himself, 
but  he  was  very  fond  of  music.  In  Washington,  at  any  unusual 
musical  entertainment,  when  his  Senatorial  duties  would  per 
mit,  his  place  was  seldom  vacant.  It  became  a  common  source 
of  recreation  to  him. 

During  the  long  winter  evenings  he  plunged  into  his  books 
and  read  late  into  the  night.  Some  of  his  friends  remonstrated 
that  such  hours,  as  he  kept,  must  result  in  breaking  down  his 
health.  But  he  confessed  to  them  that  he  felt  lonesome.  They 
were  happy  in  their  homes  with  their  wives  and  their  families, 
while  he  was  deprived  of  this  source  of  pleasure.  He  admitted 
that  he  envied  them  the  happiness  they  enjoyed.  They  rallied 
him  about  remaining  single,  and  he  enjoyed  this  raillery,  in  fact 
seemed  rather  to  encourage  it ;  but  the  old  excuse  remained, 
he  did  not  think  his  income  sufficient,  his  mother  needed  his 
company ;  and  perhaps  his  thoughts  wandered  tenderly  back  to 
other  days  when,  with  a  kindlier  fortune,  a  happiness  such  as 
these  nearer  friends  enjoyed  might  have  come  to  him. 

One  of  the  homes  he  most  enjoyed  was  that  of  George  Ban 
croft,  the  historian.  He  was  a  Democrat  and  hence  did  not 


210          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

have  the  feeling  of  his  Whig  friends,  whose  party  was  being 
split  up  with  dissensions  about  slavery.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  up  to  this  time,  the  anti-slavery  Whigs  had  been  making 
combinations  in  Massachusetts  with  the  Democrats  so  as  to 
help  one  another  with  their  elections.  Bancroft  and  his  wife 
were  interested  in  the  slavery  discussions  and  were  fond  of 
Sumner.  He  frequently  spent  an  evening  at  their  house  and 
watched  the  progress  of  the  History  of  the  United  States,  upon 
which  Bancroft  was  engaged,  reading  the  proofs  of  the  volumes 
before  their  publication.  He  did  a  similar  service  for  Long 
fellow  and  Prescott.  Mrs.  Bancroft  was  a  kind,  motherly 
woman  to  whom  Sumner  was  much  attached.  But  Bancroft 
went  to  Europe  in  1846,  as  Minister  to  England.  Sumner  cor 
responded  with  them  and  enjoyed  their  letters.  They  cautioned 
him  not  to  be  too  extreme  in  his  political  views  and  discussed 
them  with  his  European  friends,  who  were  eager  for  news  of 
him.  But  Sumner  had  in  turn  to  correct  the  erroneous  impres 
sions  of  some  of  his  English  friends,  which  they  seemed  to  have 
received  from  the  Bancrofts. 

Lord  Morpeth  wrote  him  not  to  be  quixotic,  even  in  so  right 
eous  a  cause,  and  Sumner  in  answer  wrote  that  his  position  was 
simply  that  "the  Federal  Government  should  make  all  legal 
and  constitutional  efforts  for  the  removal  of  this  monster  evil," 
but  he  was  careful  to  add,  that  he  was  not  one  of  those  who  at 
tacked  the  Constitution  and  the  Union  and  would  destroy  both 
to  destroy  slavery.  He  reminded  Morpeth  that  he  was  not  in 
good  standing  with  the  Abolitionists,  because  he  fell  so  far 
short  of  their  views,  but  admitted  that  he  could  not  see  with 
complacency  this  curse  unchecked  in  its  career  in  his  native 
land.  He  urged  Morpeth  to  jar  Prescott  a  little,  who  seemed 
to  be  so  indifferent  about  it. 

Morpeth  did  not  enjoy  letter-writing,  yet  he  was  still  loyal  to 
Sumner  and  seemed  to  take  an  almost  brotherly  interest  in  his 
success.  But  Sumner's  correspondence  with  European  friends 
was  not  so  frequent  as  it  had  been.  He  had  an  occasional  letter 
from  Lady  Montagu,  who  still  maintained  her  kindly  interest 
in  him.  Eichard  Cobden,  Eobert  Ingham,  Joseph  Parkes, 
John  Kenyon  and  Professor  Whewell  also  wrote  him  occasion 
ally  from  England;  Professor  Mittermaier  and  Dr.  Julius 
•wrote  from  Germany;  George  W.  Greene  from  Borne,  others 
as  Earl  Pitzwilliam  and  Earl  Wharncliffe,  commended  their 
friends  to  him  by  letters  of  introduction,  when  they  were  about 
to  visit  Boston.  They  all  showed  their  continued  friendly  in 
terest,  reminding  him  of  their  pleasure  in  his  former  visit  and 
hoped  he  would  come  to  Europe  again.  And  he  took  pleasure 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  211 

when  they  or  their  friends  were  in  Boston  in  taking  them  to 
such  homes  of  his  friends  as  Longfellow's  and  Prescott's. 

Prescott  like  Longfellow  never  allowed  politics  to  interfere 
with  his  friendship  for  Sumner.  But,  unlike  Longfellow's, 
his  view  differed  radically  from  Sumner's.  He  belonged  to  the 
intensely  conservative  class  then  numerous  in  Boston  and,  in 
deed,  generally  in  the  North,  who  while  admitting  slavery  was 
wrong,  still  insisted  it  was  none  of  their  business,  that  it  be 
longed  to  the  South  and  it  was  her  duty  to  destroy  it,  that  the 
North  had  suffered  too  much  disturbance  on  account  of  it  al 
ready.  Prescott  and  Longfellow  both  had  summer  homes,  out 
of  the  city  and  Sumner  was  in  the  habit  of  visiting  at  both. 
He  and  Prescott  occasionally  took  a  trip  together — to  Wash 
ington  and  to  New  York.  Prescott  being  unable  to  write  by 
reason  of  his  defective  sight,  Sumner  then  acted  as  his  sec 
retary.  Their  relations  were  too  pleasant  to  be  disturbed  by 
politics,  for  which  Prescott  confessedly  cared  little. 

And  some,  other  than  Sumner's  literary  friends,  refused  to 
participate  in  the  disposition  to  cut  him  for  his  politics.  Of 
these  was  William  Kent,  the  son  of  Chancellor  James  Kent  of 
New  York.  They  appreciated  him  for  other  reasons  and  would 
not  let  this  one  flaw,  as  they  considered  it,  destroy  their  ap 
preciation  of  so  much  beside,  that  they  saw  good  in  him.  Kent 
was  for  two  years  after  the  death  of  Judge  Story,  a  lecturer  in 
the  Harvard  Law  School,  the  place  Sumner  had  once  coveted; 
and  while  there  he  and  Sumner  had  formed  a  lasting  friend 
ship.  He  left  Cambridge  in  1847,  but  continued  to  correspond 
with  Sumner.  He  called  him,  in  one  of  his  letters,  his  "  warm 
hearted,  but  politically  considered,  most  erring  friend,"  ad 
mitted  the  generous  and  noble  motives  in  his  career  and  tried 
to  reclaim  him  to  the  Whigs.  But  Sumner  was  not  to  be  re 
claimed.  He  was  too  firmly  convinced  he  was  right  and  felt 
hurt  that  Kent  should  have  thought  so  lightly  of  his  convic 
tions. 

Kent  answered:  "Rightly  considered,  what  I  wrote  was 
proof  of  esteem,  like  Parson  Thwackum's  birching  of  Tom  Jones. 
Had  you  been  an  ordinary  philanthropist,  a  common  abolition 
ist,  a  mere  ranting  patriot,  like  some  of  your  friends,  I  should 
never  have  troubled  myself  about  you.  *  *  *  Now,  my  dear 
Charlie,  believe  that  you  have  a  most  affectionate  friend  in  me. 
I  will  fret  and  carp  no  more.  Ride  your  hobbies  all  over  the 
cote  gauche.  I  will  get  out  of  the  way  when  the  fit  is  on  you, 
and  always  be,  yours  truly  and  faithfully." 

It  argues  something  for  Sumner's  decision  of  character  that 
he  was  able  to  see  one  friend  after  another  drop  away  from 


212  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

him,  or  criticise  his  course  as  wrong,  and  still  go  calmly  on  to 
the  accomplishment  of  his  great  purpose,  sinking  all  thoughts 
of  himself  and  of  his  own  comfort,  in  the  attainment  of  what 
he  had  dedicated  himself  to  accomplish.  He  loved  the  society 
of  his  friends  and  he  was  sensitive  to  the  slights  that  were 
thrust  at  him,  but  he  was  bent  on  doing  his  duty  as  he  saw 
it,  and  for  this  he  was  willing  to  put  aside  other  considerations, 
waiting  for  a  later  time  to  bring  him  the  plaudit  that  he 
thought  would  follow.  "To  the  motto  on  my  seal,  f  Alter  i 
saeculo ' ,"  John  Quincy  Adams  had  written  him,  "  add, 
Delenda  est  servitus  " .  Unlike  Adams,  Sumner  lived  to  see 
the  service  for  another  generation  become  the  work  of  his 
own. 

While  Sumner  lost  many  friends,  by  his  political  course  he 
also  gained  some  new  ones.  It  brought  him  into  close  relations 
with  John  Quincy  Adams,  whose  warfare  for  freedom  was  draw 
ing  to  a  close.  He  had  retired  from  the  Presidency  in  1829, 
sixty-two  years  of  age,  a  time  in  life  when  most  men  consider 
their  life  work  done  and  their  laurels  gathered.  But  Adams 
the  next  year  accepted  a  seat  in  Congress  and  there  for  eighteen 
years  he  worked  out  the  greatest  part  of  his  career.  He  had 
occupied  the  highest  office  in  the  gift  of  his  country,  his  fame 
was  secure,  his  position  with  his  constituents  in  the  Quincy 
District  was  also  secure  and  so  without  ambition  and  without 
fear,  the  Scylla  and  Charybdis  of  so  many  political  careers  he 
was  left,  with  great  ability  and  with  unparalleled  industry  to 
devote  himself  to  the  anti-slavery  cause.  It  can  truly  be  said 
that  no  slave-holder  ever  held  the  whip. over  him.  His  atten 
tion  was  first  attracted  to  Sumner  by  his  oration  on  "  The 
True  Grandeur  of  Nations ".  But  it  was  after  Sumner  en 
listed  in  the  anti-slavery  cause  that  they  became  intimate. 
From  that  time  to  the  close  of  his  life,  Sumner  saw  and  con 
versed  with  him  frequently,  during  the  vacations  of  Congress, 
when  at  his  home  in  Quincy. 

Some  of  this  intimacy  was  brought  about  by  Sumner's  as 
sociations  with  his  son,  Charles  Francis  Adams.  He  was  four 
years  Sumner's  senior.  They  had  known  each  other  for  a 
long  time  but  their  intimacy  sprang  from  their  activity  in  the 
anti-slavery  campaigns.  They,  with  others,  had  purchased  a 
Boston  newspaper,  The  Whig,  that  they  might  have  a 
means  of  reaching  the  public.  The  editing  of  this  paper 
brought  them  much  together.  Sumner  was  a  frequent  con 
tributor  and  the  controversy  with  Winthrop,  on  his  part,  was 
carried  on  through  its  columns.  In  the  absence  of  Adams, 
Sumner  was  its  editor.  They  were  thus  brought  closely  to- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  213 

gcther  and  a  similarity  of  tastes  resulted  in  a  lasting  friend 
ship  and  compensated  Sumner  for  the  loss  of  other  friends.  It 
was  fruitful  of  great  results  to  both.  Adams  was  instrumental 
in  placing  Sumner  in  the  Senate ;  and  it  was  largely  on  Stun 
ner's  recommendation  that  Adams  became  Minister  to  Great 
Britain,  during  the  Civil  War,  in  which  position  he  gained  a 
lasting  fame.  The  Adams  family  was  the  most  prominent  one 
in  Massachusetts  and  while  not  distinguished  for  some  popular 
traits,  their  marked  ability,  their  industry  and  their  sturdy 
honesty,  with  the  prestige  of  their  history,  made  their  influence 
at  the  time  an  important  one. 

Another  friend  who  came  to  Sumner  in  the  same  way  was 
Henry  Wilson.  This  friendship  too  was  lasting.  From  1855 
to  1873,  Wilson  was  Sumner's  colleague  in  the  Senate.  From 
a  poor  boy,  the  son  of  a  farm  laborer,  apprenticed  first  to  a 
farmer  and  then  to  a  shoemaker,  by  name  Jeremiah  Jones 
Colbait,  which  he  had  changed  to  Henry  Wilson  by  the  Legis 
lature,  he  arose  through  successive  grades  to  the  second  place 
in  the  Republic.  He  was  elected  Vice-President  on  the  ticket 
with  Grant.  He  had  been  a  member  of  the  Legislature  and  a 
State  Senator  and  was  now  one  of  the  foremost  champions  of 
the  anti-slavery  cause.  He  had  gone  out  of  the  convention, 
offended  at  the  nomination  of  Taylor  and  promptly  joined  the 
Free-Soil  Party  and  became  Chairman  of  its  State  committee, 
in  1849,  to  succeed  Sumner.  He  was  the  editor  of  a  Free-Soil 
paper,  the  Boston  Republican,  from  1849  to  1850,  and  in  1851 
he  was  the  unsuccessful  candidate  of  the  party  for  Congress 
and  in  1853  the  unsuccessful  candidate  of  his  party  for  Gov 
ernor.  The  mere  statement  of  these  facts  shows  how  close  his 
course  lay  to  Summer's  and  how  firm  their  friendship  was. 

Prominent  among  Sumner's  new  friends  should  be  mentioned 
Joshua  R.  Giddings,  for  twenty  years  the  Representative  in 
Congress  of  the  North-east  Ohio  district  and  next  to  John 
Quincy  Adams,  the  greatest  early  champion  of  Freedom  in  the 
House.  Adams  had  said  to  Sumner,  as  he  lay  on  his  sick  bed  in 
Quincy,  after  he  was  stricken  with  the  paralysis  that  later,  at 
Washington,  closed  his  life,  that  he  looked  to  Giddings  with 
more  interest  than  to  any  other  member  of  the  House.  Sum 
ner  had  sent  Giddings  a  copy  of  his  oration  on  "  The  Scholar, 
the  Jurist,  the  Artist  and  the  Philanthropist."  Giddings  ac 
knowledged  it  in  a  complimentary  letter,  the  first  that  passed 
between  them.  Sumner  met  him  first,  at  the  convention  to 
organize  the  Free-Soil  Party,  held  in  Worcester  in  1848,  where 
they  both  spoke  and  again  when  Giddings  came  to  Boston  to 


214  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

attend  the  funeral  of  John  Quincy  Adams.  It  is  a  curious 
fact  that  ostracism  on  account  of  his  political  creed  was  carried 
so  far  in  the  House,  that  Giddings  was  denied  a  place  on  the 
Congressional  committee  to  attend  the  remains  of  his  venerable 
colleague  to  their  last  resting  place,  though  they  had  together, 
bravely  and  almost  alone,  for  many  years,  borne  the  storm  of  the 
unpopularity  of  the  anti-slavery  cause  in  the  Capitol.  But  he 
went  privately  to  pay  his  debt  at  the  grave  of  his  friend.  From 
this  time  until  Gidding's  death  in  1864,  he  and  Sumner,  when 
not  together  in  Washington,  maintained  a  cordial  correspond 
ence.  Until  his  election  to  the  Senate,  Sumner  relied  on  him 
for  information  of  what  was  transpiring  at  Washington  and 
asked  his  advice  about  political  movements  at  home. 

Such  were  some  of  Sumner's  more  intimate  new  made 
friends,  but  by  no  means  all  of  them.  He  was  also  making  a 
wide  circle  of  acquaintances  in  his  campaign  work,  among  the 
members  of  his  party,  in  the  places  where  he  spoke;  and  his 
chairmanship  of  the  State  Committee  of  the  Free-Soil  Party  in 
1848,  contributed  largely  to  the  same  result.  He  had  thereby 
of  necessity  become  acquainted  with  the  leaders  of  his  party 
in  every  county  of  the  State.  This  acquaintance  was  often 
slight,  but  such  persons  coming  to  Boston,  frequently  dropped 
into  his  office  and  a  passing  acquaintance  often  ripened  into 
a  lasting  friendship.  Such  anti-slavery  men  as  resided  in  Bos 
ton  often  brought  him  business,  as  well  as  their  good  will.  It 
was  so  in  the  case  of  the  Adams  family. 

But,  generally  speaking,  his  politics  did  not  contribute  to 
his  professional  success.  Clients  who  furnish  the  most  business 
are  not  usually  much  engaged  in  politics,  especially  politics 
of  his  kind,  that  furnished  no  material  advantage  and  was  be 
sides  unpopular.  They  could  easily  see  that  Sumner's  thoughts 
were  not  absorbed  with  his  law  office  and  he  did  not  get  the 
business  because  they  thought  it  would  not  receive  his  best 
attention.  With  feeling  running  against  the  anti-slavery  men. 
in  Boston,  some  thought  to  gratify  their  dislike,  by  inaugu 
rating  a  systematic  boycott  against  the  members  of  the  unpopu 
lar  party.  They  withheld  from  them  their  own  business  and 
sought  to  influence  others  to  do  likewise.  The  prominence  of 
Sumner  in  the  party,  made  him  a  shining  mark  for  their  dis 
like.  His  professional  income  at  this  time  was  not  more  than 
sufficient  for  his  own  personal  expenses,  and  they  were  mod 
erate, — only  the  ordinary  expenses  of  an  unmarried  attorney, 
with  a  modest  office  and  a  summer's  vacation. 

Sumner  devoted  much  of  his  time  in  1850  to  an  edition  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  215 

his  Speeches  and  Addresses  which  was  published  in  Boston  in 
two  volumes.  A  third  volume,  of  more  recent  addresses,  in 
cluding  his  speech  on  the  Crime  against  Kansas  was  issued  in 
1856.  Before  their  publication  he  made  a  careful  revision  of 
them. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

THE    COMPROMISE    OF    1850 WEBSTER'S    SEVENTH    OF    MARCH 

SPEECH THE  ELECTION COALITION  OF  FREE-SOILERS  AND 

DEMOCRATS SUMNER     A     CANDIDATE     FOR     SENATOR — THE 

LONG     CONTEST SUMNER    ELECTED HIS    ACCEPTANCE    OF 

THE  OFFICE 

THE  year  1850  was  an  eventful  one  for  Massachusetts. 
Henry  Clay  had  been  returned  to  the  United  States  Senate,  in 
the  hope  that  he  might  present  some  measure  that  would  pacify 
the  constantly  rising  animosity  between  the  North  and  the 
South  and  he  again  established  his  right  to  be  called  "  the 
great  pacificator ".  The  territory  that  we  had  acquired  by 
the  war  with  Mexico  and  out  of  which  the  South  had  hoped 
to  gain  more  slave  states  had  proved  a  disappointment  to  that 
section.  The  discovery  of  gold  in  California  had  caused  a 
large  influx  of  population,  mostly  from  the  North  into  this 
part  of  the  newly  acquired  territory.  It  was  now  seeking  ad 
mission  with  a  constitution  prohibiting  slavery.  This  had  an 
gered  the  South.  Clay  introduced  a  series  of  resolutions  to 
pacify  this  feeling.  They  provided  for  the  admission  of  Cali 
fornia,  without  slavery,  and  as  the  North  had  been  insisting 
upon  the  -prohibition  of  slavery  in  all  the  territory  acquired 
from  Mexico,  a  second  resolution  provided  governments  for 
this  territory  without  prohibition  or  permission  of  slavery, — a 
concession  to  the  South.  Another  concession  to  the  South  was 
the  allowance  of  $10,000,000  to  Texas  in  aid  of  the  payment 
of  her  debt.  As  a  counter  concession  to  the  North,  the  slave- 
trade, — the  buying  and  selling  but  not  the  holding  of  slaves — 
was  to  be  prohibited  in  the  District  of  Columbia.  As  an  off 
set  to  this,  a  law  for  the  apprehension  of  fugitive  slaves  was  to 
be  enacted.  As  proposed,  it  had  two  provisions  in  it  that  were 
especially  obnoxious  to  the  North ;  first,  it  provided  no  trial  by 
jury  of  the  right  of  the  alleged  slave  to  his  freedom,  and,  sec 
ond,  it  allowed  the  U.  S.  commissioner,  who  had  the  sole  power 
of  deciding  upon  his  right  to  freedom,  a  fee  of  Ten  dollars  in 
case  of  a  conviction  and  only  Five  dollars,  if  freed,  thus  offer 
ing  the  judge  a  bribe  for  conviction. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  session  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  of  Bos 
ton  was  defeated,  as  has  been  mentioned  in  his  race  for  the 

216 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  217 

Speakership  of  the  House  by  Howell  Cobb,  of  Georgia.  Cobb 
was  elected  by  a  plurality,  but  not  by  a  majority  of  the  vote 
cast.  This  was  the  first  time  that  a  speaker  had  been  so 
elected;  and,  by  anti-slavery  men  it  was  regarded  as  another 
encroachment  of  the  South.  As  the  Session  wore  away  the 
people  watched  with  new  interest  the  debate  on  the  compromise 
measures.  One  after  another  of  the  leaders  of  the  section  had 
spoken, — Clay  and  Cass,  Benton  and  Douglas,  Jefferson  Davis 
and  E.  M.  T.  Hunter,  John  P.  Hale  and  William  H.  Seward, 
Thos.  Corwin  and  Salmon  P.  Chase.  These  were  great  men  and 
they  have  a  permanent  place  in  history.  One  incident  gave 
the  debate  in  the  Senate  a  dramatic  interest.  John  C.  Calhoun, 
the  veteran  champion  of  the  South  was  passing  away.  He 
prepared  his  last  set  speech,  on  these  resolutions  and  attempted 
to  deliver  it  on  March  fourth,  but  his  strength  failed  and  he 
had  to  have  it  read  for  him.  Within  a  month  he  was  dead. 

New  England  waited  for  the  voice  of  Daniel  Webster.  She 
had  waited  for  it  often,  to  lift  her  head  in  triumph  after  he 
had  spoken.  He  had  never  spoken  otherwise  than  for  free 
dom,  from  the  time  when  he  had  bid  the  distant  generations 
hail  and  farewell  at  Plymouth  Eock  and  hurled  his  bolts  at  the 
South  in  his  reply  to  Hayne,  down  to  this  hour.  He  was  by 
conviction  and  training  a  religious  man.  Some  of  the  most 
effective  passages  in  his  orations  had  been  spoken  when  he 
paused  in  the  course  of  his  argument  to  make  some  graceful 
acknowledgment  of  the  obligations  of  religion  and  of  the 
wisdom  and  goodness  of  God.  Once,  at  least,  in  the  Girard 
Will  case,  he  had  appeared  as  the  champion  of  the  Christian 
ministry  and  his  argument  had  become  a  classic.  How  could 
New  England  believe  that  he  would  now  prove  false  to  these 
pledges !  First  came  intimations  that  he  was  hesitating  in  his 
lifelong  course,  that  he  was  dallying  with  slavery  and  that 
he  was  not  right  upon  the  Compromise.  The  few  who  heard 
the  report  did  not  believe  it.  But  on  the  seventh  of  March, 
1850,  he  delivered  the  speech  that  has  ever  since  been  known 
by  the  date  of  its  delivery  and  has  made  that  day  memorable. 
While  from  a  literary  standpoint,  it  is  one  of  the  least  inter 
esting  of  all  his  speeches,  the  reproach  it  has  brought  upon  its 
author  has  made  it  one  of  the  best  known.  The  worst  fears  of 
the  friends  of  freedom  were  realized. 

The  speech  coming  from  some  of  the  extreme  pro-slavery 
men  of  the  South  would  not  have  attracted  attention.  But 
Webster  had  deliberately  said  that  all  Christendom  was  "  bound 
by  everything  which  belonged  to  its  character  and  to  the 
character  of  the  present  age,  to  put  a  stop  to  this  inhuman 


218  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  disgraceful  traffic."  How  could  New  England  believe  that 
Daniel  Webster  who  had  spoken  so  decidedly  upon  this  question 
and  who  had  never  abated  one  jot  of  his  deliberately  formed 
opinion  would  now  say: 

"  There  are  thousands  of  religious  men,  with  consciences  as 
tender  as  any  of  their  brethren  at  the  North  who  do  not  see 
the  unlawfulness  of  slavery,  and  there  are  more  thousands, 
perhaps,  that,  whatsoever  they  may  think  of  it  in  its  origin, 
and  as  a  matter  depending  upon  natural  right,  yet  take  things 
as  they  are,  and,  finding  slavery  to  be  an  established  relation 
of  society  in  which  they  live,  can  see  no  way,  in  which,  let  their 
opinions  on  this  abstract  question  be  what  they  may,  it  is  in 
the  power  of  the  present  generation  to  relieve  themselves  from 
this  relation.  And  candor  obliges  me  to  say,  that  I  believe  they 
are  just  as  conscientious,  many  of  them,  and  as  religious 
people,  all  of  them,,  as  they  are  at  the  North  who  hold  different 
opinions/' 

In  this  same  speech,  he  said:  "I  wish  it  to  be  distinctly 
understood  that  according  to  my  view  of  the  matter,  this  Gov 
ernment  is  solemnly  pledged,  by  law  and  contract,  to  create  new 
States  out  of  Texas,  with  her  consent,  when  her  population 
shall  justify  and  call  for  such  a  proceeding,  and,  so  far  as 
such  States  are  formed  out  of  Texas  territory  lying  south  of 
36°  30',  to  let  them  come  in  as  slave  States.  That  is  the 
meaning  of  the  contract  which  our  friends  the  Northern  Democ 
racy,  have  left  us  to  fulfil ;  and  I  for  one  mean  to  fulfil  it, 
because  I  will  not  violate  the  faith  of  the  Government." 

He  then  proceeded  to  prove  the  proposition  that  all  the 
territory  of  the  United  States  was  irrevocably  fixed  as  free  or 
slave, — part  of  it  by  the  pledge  of  the  Government  in  its  pre 
vious  compromises  and  part  of  it  by  the  laws  of  physical  geog 
raphy  which  would  prevent  slave  labor  from  being  profitably 
employed  in  such  hilly  and  mountainous  territory,  as  California 
and  New  Mexico.  It  was  in  this  connection  that  out  of  defer 
ence  to  the  feelings  of  the  South  whom  it  might  offend  he 
declared  that  if  "  a  proposition  were  now  here  to  establish  a 
government  for  New  Mexico,  and  it  was  moved  to  insert  a 
provision  for  a  prohibition  of  slavery,  I  would  not  vote  for  it." 
Such  passages  as  this  were  calculated  to  astonish  his  constit 
uents  in  New  England,  where  they  had  not  yet  reached  the 
conclusion  that  the  whole  of  their  country  had  been  irrevocably 
partitioned  between  slavery  and  freedom. 

But  when  he  turned  from  these  things  to  criticise  the  whole 
North,  because  she  did  not  sufficiently  bestir  herself  in  the 
business  of  hunting  down  and  returning  fugitive  slaves  to 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNEK      ,  .   219 

their  former  masters  and  "  insisted  that  the  South  had  been 
injured  in  this  respect  and  the  North  had  been  too  careless," 
the  surprise  of  New  England  was  still  greater.  It  was  only 
equalled  when  he  proceeded  a  little  further  on  to  criticise  the 
legislatures  of  the  North  for  memorializing  Congress  on  the 
abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia  and  the  States ; 
and  emphatically  said  he  "  should  be  unwilling  to  receive  from 
the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  any  instruction  to  present  res 
olutions  expressive  of  any  opinion  whatever  on  the  subject  of 
slavery  as  it  existed  at  that  moment  in  the  States."  He  went 
out  of  his  way  in  the  course  of  his  argument  to  compliment 
Hillard,  Sumner's  former  law-partner,  for  opposing  such  reso 
lutions  in  the  Senate  of  Massachusetts. 

His  next  attack  was  upon  the  Abolition  Societies.  "  He  did 
not  think  them  useful.  He  thought  their  operations  for  the  last 
twenty  years  had  produced  nothing  good  or  valuable." 

These  were  strange  things  for  Daniel  Webster  to  say.  His 
Boston — his  ever  faithful  Boston — was  ready  to  follow  him 
even  to  this  length.  But  the  balance  of  the  State  would  not. 
By  a  very  large  majority,  the  newspapers  of  the  State,  outside 
of  Boston,  condemned  the  speech.  In  Boston  the  Whig  papers 
were  still  loyal  to  him.  It  was  estimated  that  only  six  out  of 
seventy  of  the  newspapers  of  New  England  approved  the 
speech.  About  the  same  proportion  of  the  people  were  against 
it.  His  admirers  still  seeking  as  of  old,  to  show  their  loyalty 
to  him,  sought  by  circulating  memorials,  approving  its  doc 
trines,  to  stem  the  popular  tide  against  it.  These  memorials 
when  presented  to  him,  drew  forth  a  series  of  letters  in  an 
swer  to  them,  that  confirmed  the  people  in  their  belief  in  his 
apostacy  and  in  their  judgment  of  the  speech.  Daniel  Webster 
no  longer  represented  Massachusetts.  Proud  as  his  position  had 
been  in  the  confidence  of  her  people  he  had  forfeited  it.  So 
far  they  would  not  go  even  with  him.  He  doubtless  felt  all  he 
said  of  the  dangers  of  the  further  agitation  of  the  slave  question 
to  the  Union  whose  preservation  had  been  the  cherished  object 
of  his  political  life ;  but  he  had  grown  old  and  somewhat  out  of 
touch  with  the  public  and  this  sentiment  of  fear  for  the 
Union,  for  which,  in  his  childhood,  he  was  taught  his  father 
had  toiled,  through  the  fire  and  blood  of  a  seven  years'  revolu 
tionary  war  and  which  he  shrunk  from  no  danger  and  no  hard 
ship  to  serve,  and  to  which  he  had  dedicated  so  much  of  his  own 
labor  through  so  many  years  now  drawing  to  their  close,  had 
grown  out  of  its  due  proportion.  The  history  of  the  years  from 
1861  to  1865  has  indeed  proved  how  well  his  fears  were 
founded.  But  fear  for  the  Union  had  ceased  to  have  its  former 


220      .  L1FE  °F  CHARLES  SVMNER 

power  with  younger  men  now  coming  to  control.  They  had 
made  up  their  minds  to  heed  it  no  longer,  but  to  be  true  to  their 
consciences  and  bear  what  came.  They  felt  that  too  much  had 
been  yielded  already  to  slavery  and  that  the  North  could  go  no 
farther  without  a  sacrifice  of  its  manhood. 

The  sands  of  Webster's  term  in  the  Senate  were  fast  running 
out.  The  Legislature  was  to  be  elected  this  year  that  would 
choose  his  successor.  With  all  the  effort  his  friends  were  mak 
ing  to  prepare  the  way  for  his  re-election,  he  doubtless  saw  that 
his  return  would  be  doubtful  and  was  glad  to  escape  the  trial 
by  accepting  the  position  of  Secretary  of  State  in  Fillmore's 
cabinet,  where  his  lately  expressed  opinions  were  not  unpopular. 

The  election  came  and  Webster's  worst  fears  were  realized. 
The  Whigs  were  defeated.  The  part  Sumner  took  was  much 
the  same  as  in  the  two  previous  campaigns.  The  demand  for 
him  as  a  speaker  continued  to  grow  with  his  increasing  fame. 
The  Free-Soil  and  the  Democratic  parties  united  upon  can 
didates  for  the  Legislature  and  for  Congress,  in  all  the  counties 
of  the  State  except  Middlesex.  The  result  was  a  victory  for  the 
combination,  giving  them  a  majority  of  ten  over  the  Whigs  in 
the  Senate  and  a  majority  of  fifty-four  in  the  House.  There 
was  much  rejoicing  at  the  result.  It  was  fairly  regarded  as  a 
rejection  of  the  Compromise  and  of  Webster's  speech.  True,  by 
retiring  before  the  storm  into  Fillmore's  cabinet,  he  was  not  a 
candidate,  but  Robert  C.  Winthrop  had  been  appointed  his  suc 
cessor  by  the  Governor,  at  Mr.  Webster's  suggestion,  and  had 
entered  the  Senate  in  time  to  vote  for  the  Compromise.  The 
Free-Soilers  at  once  took  up  the  gage  thus  thrown  down  and 
freely  insisted  that  he  stood  for  all  Webster  did  and  that  a  vote 
against  him  was  a  vote  against  the  Compromise  and  Webster 
and  his  views  on  the  slavery  question.  It  is  certain  that  without 
the  indignation  aroused  by  the  Compromise  and  by  Webster's 
abandonment  of  his  lifelong  convictions  upon  the  slavery 
question,  the  result  would  not  have  been  possible. 

The  consequences  were  not  less  far-reaching.  Without  the 
election  resulting  as  it  did,  no  way  would  probably  ever  have 
opened  for  Sumner  to  enter  the  Senate.  He  might  have  been 
known  among  scholars  as  an  accomplished  orator  and  he  might 
have  had  a  permanent  place  as  the  author  of  some  historical 
work ;  but  this  would  have  been  far  short  of  the  fame  he  gained 
in  his  seat,  in  the  Senate,  by  his  efforts  against  slavery.  What 
his  loss  might  have  been  to  the  country  is  harder  to  measure. 
Whether  the  country  was  ripe  for  the  changes  he  did  so  much 
to  bring  about  and  whether,  if  he  had  not,  others  would  have 
reaped  the  same  fields,  may  fairly  be  questioned.  Others  were 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  221 

there  before  him  and  still  others  came  afterward  to  the  Senate 
to  represent  the  same  cause;  but  faithful  as  they  were  and  much 
as  they  accomplished,  they  lacked  the  fearless  and  aggressive 
leadership  of  Sumner.  Without  these  qualities  being  developed 
in  some  one  else,  the  same  help  of  the  Senate  at  least  would 
have  been  wanting  in  the  days  of  struggle. 

What  attracted  especial  attention  to  Sumner  and  probably 
made  him  the  choice  of  his  party  for  Senator  was  his  speech 
on  "  Our  Immediate  Anti-Slavery  Duties  "  delivered  at  a  Free- 
Soil  meeting,  held  in  Faneuil  Hall  a  few  days  before  the  elec 
tion  of  1850.  The  Fugitive  Slave  Law  had  only  recently  been 
enacted  and  its  provisions  were  imperfectly  understood  by  the 
public.  Sumner's  speech  was  the  first  discussion  of  it  before 
the  people.  It  was  an  earnest  and  emphatic  denunciation  of  the 
provisions  of  the  law  and  it  was  Sumner's  purpose  by  the  speech 
to  render  it  so  odious  and  awaken  such  a  feeling  against  it  as  to 
make  its  enforcement  in  Boston  impossible.  The  speech 
touched  a  popular  chord  and  aroused  immense  enthusiasm. 
The  audience  at  its  close  proposed  and  gave,  with  a  will,  three 
cheers  for  Charles  Sumner.  It  is  more  popular  in  its  tone, 
more  direct  and  emphatic  in  its  purpose  and  is  more  spon 
taneous, — smells  less  of  preparation,  than  any  of  his  other 
speeches. 

After  expressing  his  approval  of  the  combination  of  Free- 
Soilers  with  the  Whigs  to  elect  Mann  and  Fowler  to  Congress 
and  with  the  Democrats,  in  the  senatorial  and  legislative  dis 
tricts,  to  secure  control  of  the  State  Legislature,  he  congratu 
lated  them  on  the  admission  of  California  as  a  State,  with  a 
constitution  prohibiting  slavery  and  the  abolition  of  the  slave 
trade  in  the  District  of  Columbia.  He  then  proceeded  to 
discuss  the  Fugitive  Slave  law.  He  insisted  that,  denying  the 
person  apprehended  a  trial  by  jury,  it  was  unconstitutional; 
that  it  was  also  unconstitutional  because  of  the  unprecedented 
and  tyrannical  powers  it  conferred  upon  the  petty  office  of  U. 
S.  commissioner,  providing  him  a  fee  of  Ten  dollars  for  a 
conviction  and  only  Five  dollars  for  an  acquittal  of  the 
prisoner,  virtually  offering  a  bribe  to  the  judge.  It  permitted 
him  to  convict  the  prisoner  and  consign  him  to  perpetual  bond 
age,  upon  mere  ex  parte  affidavits,  taken,  perhaps,  in  a  distant 
state,  so  as  to  deny  the  accused  the  right  to  face  and  cross- 
examine  the  witnesses  produced  against  him.  Sumner  signifi 
cantly  said,  that,  while  he  was  a  commissioner,  himself  and 
might  be  called  upon  to  sit  in  such  a  case,  he  could  not  forget 
that  he  was  a  man,  although  he  was  a  commissioner,  and  that 
he  would  not  dishonor  the  home  of  the  Pilgrims  and  of  the 


222  LIF&  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Revolution  by  admitting, — nay,  by  believing  that  this  bill 
would  be  executed  in  Massachusetts.  He  invoked  an  irresist 
ible  public  opinion  to  prevent  it  and  to  prohibit  any  slave- 
hunter  from  ever  setting  his  foot  in' the  Commonwealth. 

It  was  a  powerful  arraignment  of  the  law,  into  which  the 
speaker  threw  his  whole  force.  "  And  yet,"  he  said,  "  in  the 
face  of  these  enormities  of  legislation, — of  Territories  organ 
ized  without  the  prohibition  of  slavery,  and  of  this  execrable 
Fugitive  Slave  Bill"  (he  refused  to  call  it  a  Law)  " — in  the 
face  also  of  slavery  still  sanctioned  in  the  District  of  Columbia, 
of  the  Slave  Trade  between  domestic  ports,  under  the  flag  of 
the  Union,  and  of  the  Slave  Power  still  dominant  over  the 
National  Government,  we  are  told  that  the  slavery  Question  is 
settled.  Yes,  settled, — settled, — -that  is  the  word.  Nothing,  sir, 
can  be  settled  which  is  not  right.  Nothing  can  be  settled  which 
is  contrary  to  the  Divine  Law.  Nature  and  all  the  holy  senti 
ments  of  the  heart  repudiate  any  such  false,  seeming  settle 
ment." 

"  Amidst  the  shifts  and  changes  of  party,  our  Duties  remain, 
pointing  the  way  to  action.  By  no  subtile  compromise  or  ad 
justment  can  men  suspend  the  commandments  of  God.  By  no 
trick  of  managers,  no  hocus-pocus  of  politicians,  no  mush  of 
concession,  can  we  be  released  from  this  obedience.  It  is,  then, 
in  the  light  of  duties  that  we  are  to  find  peace  for  our  country 
and  ourselves.  Nor  can  any  settlement  promise  peace  which  is 
not  in  harmony  with  these  everlasting  principles  from  which 
our  duties  spring/' 

He  demanded  the  immediate  repeal  of  the  Bill,  the  abolition 
of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  prohibition  of  it  in 
the  Territories,  the  refusal  to  receive  into  the  Union  any  new 
slave  States,  the  abolition  of  the  slave  trade  on  the  high  seas 
and  the  exercise  of  all  its  constitutional  powers  by  the  National 
Government  to  relieve  itself  of  its  responsibility  for  slavery 
everywhere.  And  he  insisted  that  the  slave  Power  be  over 
turned  and  the  National  Government  be  put  openly,  actively 
and  perpetually  on  the  side  of  Freedom.  He  demanded  that 
this  Power,  which  in  the  game  of  office  and  legislation,  had 
always  won  should  now  be  suppressed. 

He  emphatically  said,  as  to  the  men  to  be  chosen  for  office: 
"  Admonished  by  experience,  of  timidity,  irresolution  and  weak 
ness  in  our  public  men,  particularly  at  Washington,  amidst  the 
temptations  of  ambition  and  power,  the  friends  of  Freedom 
cannot  lightly  bestow  their  confidence.  They  can  put  trust  only 
in  men  of  tried  character  and  inflexible  will.  Three  things  at 
least  they  must  require:  the  first  is  backbone;  the  second  is 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  223 

backbone;  and  the  third  is  backbone.  My  language  is  homely; 
I  hardly  pardon  myself  for  using  it;  but  it  expresses  an  idea 
which  must  not  be  forgotten.  When  I  see  a  person  of  upright 
character  and  pure  soul  yielding  to  a  temporizing  policy,  I 
cannot  but  say,  He  wants  backbone.  When  I  see  a  person  talk 
ing  loudly  against  slavery  in  private,  but  hesitating  in  public, 
and  failing  in  the  time  of  trial,  I  say,  He  wants  backbone. 
When  I  see  a  person  who  co-operated  with  anti-slavery  men  and 
then  deserted  them,  I  say,  He  wants  backbone.  When  I  see  a 
person  leaning  upon  the  action  of  a  political  party  and  never 
venturing  to  think  for  himself,  I  say,  He  wants  backbone. 
When  I  see  a  person  always  careful  to  be  on  the  side  of  the 
majority  and  unwilling  to  appear  in  a  minority,  or,  if  need  be, 
to  stand  alone,  I  say,  He  wants  backbone.  Wanting  this  they 
all  want  that  courage,  constancy,  firmness,  which  are  essential 
to  the  support  of  principle.  Let  no  such  man  be  trusted." 

"  For  myself,  fellow-citizens,  my  own  course  is  determined. 
The  first  political  convention  which  I  ever  attended  was  in  the 
spring  of  1845,  against  the  annexation  of  Texas.  I  was  at  the 
time  a  silent  and  passive  Whig.  I  had  never  held  political 
office,  nor  been  a  candidate  for  any.  No  question  ever  before 
drew  me  to  any  active  political  exertion.  The  strife  of  politics 
seemed  to  me  ignoble.  A  desire  to  do  what  I  could  against 
slavery  led  me  subsequently  to  attend  two  different  State  Con 
ventions  of  Whigs,  where  I  co-operated  with  eminent  citizens 
in  endeavor  to  arouse  the  party  in  Massachusetts  to  its  anti- 
slavery  duties.  A  conviction  that  the  Whig  party  was  disloyal 
to  Freedom  and  an  ardent  aspiration  to  help  the  advancement 
of  this  great  cause,  has  led  me  to  leave  that  party  and  dedicate 
what  of  strength  and  ability  I  have  to  the  present  movement. 
To  vindicate  Freedom  and  oppose  Slavery  so  far  as  I  may  con 
stitutionally, — with  earnestness,  and  yet  I  trust  without  Tin- 
kindness  on  my  part, — is  the  object  near  my  heart." 

At  the  time  of  the  coalition  between  the  Free-Soilers  and  the 
Democrats  for  the  election  of  a  Legislature,  there  was  an  un 
derstanding  between  them  that  the  Democrats,  in  case  of  suc 
cess,  should  have  the  state  officers  to  be  elected  and  the  Free- 
Soilers  should  have  the  Senatorship.  No  names  were,  however, 
decided  on  for  the  offices.  The  candidates  were  to  be  chosen 
later,  by  the  respective  parties.  Earlier  in  the  campaign  several 
names  were  mentioned  for  the  Senatorship,  Stephen  C.  Phillips, 
Simmer,  Charles  Francis  Adams.  The  first  was  this  year,  and 
had  been  in  1849,  the  unsuccessful  candidate  of  his  party  for 
Governor,  and  felt  that  the  honor  should  have  come  to  him. 
After  Sumner's  nomination  he  wrote  to  him  pathetically,  "  I  re- 


224:  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

joice  in  the  conviction  that  this,  while  it  is  the  severest  is  the 
last  of  my  political  trials  and  though  it  is  far  from  being  such 
a  close  of  a  public  career  as  is  desirable  I  derive  satisfaction 
from  the  thought  that  your  race  begins,  where  mine  ends,  and 
that  a  high  destiny  awaits  you."  It  was  the  sad  confession  of 
failure  in  the  career  he  had  coveted  and  makes  his  seem  like 
the  lives  of  so  many  good  men  in  politics,  who  have  deserved  a 
better  fortune  than  came  to  them.  Adams  did  not  expect  the 
Senatorship.  He  and  Palfrey  had  not  entered  heartily  into  the 
movement  for  a  combination  with  the  Democrats,  as  Sumner 
had,  and  hence  could  not  expect  a  favorable  consideration. 
Adams,  besides,  had  been  prominent  as  a  Whig  before  he  joined 
the  Free-Soil  movement  and  was  on  that  account  still  more 
unacceptable  to  the  Democrats  now.  Sumner  had  never  been 
much  of  a  Whig  and  the  little  part  he  had  taken  in  their  coun 
cils,  was  to  advance  the  anti-slavery  cause.  He  had  never  held 
an  elective  office.  As  the  campaign  progressed,  the  choice  for 
Senator  tended  more  and  more  to  Sumner.  After  his  Faneuil 
Hall  speech,  there  was  little  mention  of  any  one  else. 

He  had  never  regarded  himself  as  a  candidate.  The  first 
information  he  had,  of  a  fixed  purpose  on  the  part  of  others  to 
so  consider  him,  came  to  him  through  a  note,  left  at  his  door, 
by  Seth  Webb,  Jr.,  the  morning  after  the  election,  telling  him 
the  result  and  adding :  "  You  are  bound  for  Washington  this 
winter."  Whittier  had  met  him  before  this  during  the  sum 
mer,  at  Lynn,  and  one  evening  as  they  loitered  by  the  sea,  had 
predicted  the  success  of  the  combination  and  that  he  would  be 
the  Senator.  Sumner  had  told  him  that  he  did  not  think  it  pos 
sible,  that  there  were  others  better  fitted  for  it,  and  besides, 
that  he  did  not  especially  desire  it,  that  his  ambition  lay  in 
other  fields.  But  Whittier  urged  him  not  to  forbid  the  use  of 
his  name  as  a  candidate,  insisted  upon  his  peculiar  qualifica 
tions  and  predicted  a  large  future  for  him  if  elected.  Years 
after,  at  the  close  of  one  of  Sumner's  fiercest  struggles  in  the 
Senate,  in  a  poem  addressed  "  To  C.  S.,"  Whittier  reminded 
him  of  this  prediction. 

After  the  result  of  the  election  was  fully  known  and  the  con 
trol  of  the  State  was  found  to  have  come  into  the  hands  of  the 
coalition,  the  trend  of  public  opinion  continued  steadily 
towards  Sumner  for  Senator,  without  any  effort  of  his  friends 
to  work  it  up.  There  came  to  be  a  conviction,  with  the  public, 
of  his  fitness  to  represent  the  general  feeling  of  the  State  upon 
the  new  issues.  "  I  think,"  one  of  the  leaders  wrote  him,  "  you 
are  nearer  my  ideal  of  a  Free-Soiler  of  this  time  than  anybody 
else ;  so  does  the  whole  Free-Soil  heart  of  New  England.  Anol 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  225 

you  may  depend  that  the  actual  triumph  of  just  such  a  man  as 
you  are  will  give  a  heavier  blow  to  the  conspirators  against 
Freedom  and  do  more  to  fortify  the  general  trust  in  the  ulti 
mate  ascendency  of  uncompromising  right,  than  that  of  any 
other  living  being.  You  cannot  escape  from  your  position." 

Charles  Francis  Adams  wrote  him  from  Washington,  of  the 
difficulties  as  he  saw  them,  of  an  alliance  with  the  Democrats, 
but  added:  "If  our  friends  decide  to  risk  themselves  in  that 
ship,  I  trust  we  may  get  a  full  consideration  for  the  risk,  and 
the  only  full  consideration  that  we  can  receive  is  in  securing 
your  services  in  the  Senate.  If  anything  can  be  done  with  that 
iron  and  marble  body,  you  may  do  it.  You  know  how  hopeless  I 
think  the  task." 

Adams  was  at  the  time  Sumner's  most  intimate  political 
friend  and,  in  replying  Sumner  wrote  fully  and  frankly  his 
feelings  upon  the  Senatorship :  "  I  appreciate  your  generosity 
and  am  proud  of  your  confidence.  I  am  not  entirely  insensible 
to.  the  honor  that  post  would  confer,  though  I  do  not  feel  this 
strongly,  for  I  have  never  been  accustomed  to  think  highly  of 
political  distinction.  I  feel  that  it  would  to  a  certain  extent  be 
a  vindication  of  me  against  the  attacks  to  which  in  common 
with  you  and  others  of  our  friends,  I  have  been  exposed.  And  I 
am  especially  touched  by  the  idea  of  the  sphere  of  usefulness 
in  which  it  would  place  me.  But  notwithstanding  these  things 
I  must  say  that  I  have  not  been  able  to  bring  myself  to  desire 
the  post  or  even  to  be  willing  to  take  it.  My  dreams  and  visions 
are  all  in  other  directions.  In  the  course  of  my  life  I  have  had 
many;  but  none  have  been  in  the  United  States  Senate.  In 
taking  that  post  I  must  renounce  forever  quiet  and  repose ;  my 
life  henceforward  would  be  in  public  affairs.  I  cannot  con 
template  this  without  repugnance.  It  would  call  upon  me  to 
forego  those  literary  plans  and  aspirations  which  I  have  more 
at  heart  than  any  merely  political  success.  Besides,  even  if  I 
should  incline  to  this  new  career,  there  are  men  in  our  ranks, 
my  seniors  and  betters,  to  whom  I  defer  sincerely  and  com 
pletely.  Mr.  Phillips  by  various  titles  should  be  our  candidate. 
If  he  should  be  unwilling  to  take  the  place,  then  we  must  look 
to  you.  In  seeing  you  there  I  should  have  the  truest  satisfac 
tion.  You  are  the  man  to  split  open  the  solid  rock  of  the 
United  States  Senate.  I  shrink  unfeignedly  from  the  work. 
For  this  I  have  never  '  filled  my  mind.' ?; 

Sumner  maintained  this  position  to  the  close  of  the  contest. 
It  had  no  purpose  of  self-seeking  with  him.  The  cause  was 
everything  and  he  insisted  even  with  his  own  prospect  of  the 
office  before  him,  that  the  promotion  of  that  must  be  kept 


226  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

steadily  in  view  and  whoever  could  best  serve  it,  ought  to  have 
the  place.  He  mistrusted  his  own  fitness  for  it  and  he  did  not 
believe  he  should  fill  it,  if  he  could  not  fill  it  best.  He  steadily 
refused  to  seek  the  place  before  his  nomination  by  the  caucus. 
Others  must  determine  the  question  of  his  fitness.  But  after 
he  had  been  chosen  by  the  caucus  and  his  success  thus  became 
welded  to  that  of  the  cause,  he  met  with  his  supporters  several 
times  in  council  and  discussed  plans  with  them  and  received 
and  made  suggestions  and  did  what  he  could  to  promote  their 
success.  But  when  the  contest  was  protracted  and  his  success 
seemed  doubtful,  he  urged  them  whenever  they  pleased,  and 
without  consulting  him,  to  abandon  the  effort  to  elect  him  and 
unite  on  any  one  else  whose  prospects  were  better.  His  course 
showed  the  absence  of  self-seeking  and  the  ideals  with  which  he 
entered  public  life.  The  sequel  will  show  that  he  maintained 
them  to  the  close. 

The  letters  he  received  from  anti-slavery  friends  in  other 
States  helped  to  confirm  him  in  his  determination  to  stand  for 
the  place.  Chase  and  Giddings  both  wrote  him  from  Washing 
ton,  insisting  that  he  could  not  refuse  to  be  a  candidate  and 
reminding  him  of  the  pleasure  it  would  give  the  friends  of  Free 
dom  to  see  him  in  the  Senate.  John  Jay  wrote  from  New 
York :  "  I  trust  most  sincerely  you  are  to  occupy  the  seat  which 
Webster,  in  bygone  days  has  filled  so  worthily,  but  where  in 
the  hour  of  temptation,  he  betrayed  the  Commonwealth  which 
had  trusted  and  honored  him."  Joshua  Leavitt  also  wrote 
him  from  New  York  that  he  wished  for  his  election  both  for 
his  own  sake  and  that  of  the  cause,  that  it  would  be,  "  a  worthy 
rebuke  of  cotton  arrogance  pronounced  in  earnest  and  sealed 
by  action  in  the  name  of  the  good  old  Commonwealth."  Other 
letters  from  other  States  also  showed  that  Free-Soilers  were 
disposed  to  treat  his  candidacy  as  the  test  of  the  strength  of  the 
opposition  to  the  cringing  attitude  of  Northern  statesmen,  to 
the  South.  Upon  this  issue  Sumner  was  already  firmly  com 
mitted.  His  dissent  from  the  recent  course  of  Webster  in  his 
seventh  of  March  speech  was  a  familiar  illustration. 

At  the  election  held  in  Massachusetts,  in  November,  1850, 
none  on  the  State  tickets  were  elected.  The  constitution  then 
required  the  successful  candidates  to  have  a  majority  of  all  the 
votes  cast,  a  mere  plurality  not  being,  as  now,  sufficient.  In 
case  of  the  failure  of  the  people  to  elect,  it  devolved  upon  the 
Legislature  to  make  a  choice  from  the  three  candidates  for  the 
office  who  at  the  general  election  had  received  the  highest  num 
ber  of  votes.  The  Free-Soilers  and  the  Democrats  having 
together  a  majority  and  having  formed  a  coalition  controlled 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  Legislature.  It  was  agreed  by  them  that  the  Democrats 
should  have  the  Governor,  State  Treasurer  and  the  United 
States  Senator  for  the  short  term, — the  balance  of  Webster's 
term,  expiring  March  fourth,  1851,  and  that  the  Free-Soilers 
should  have  the  United  States  Senator  for  the  next  full  term. 
This  gave  the  control  of  the  State  Government  to  the  Demo 
crats.  It  was  left  to  the  respective  parties,  to  determine  whom 
they  would  nominate  for  the  offices  assigned  to  them,  the  other 
party  agreeing  to  unite  in  electing  them.  Henry  Wilson,  Free- 
Soiler,  was  chosen  President  of  the  Senate,  and  N.  P.  Banks, 
Democrat,  Speaker  of  the  House. 

At  a  caucus  of  the  Free-Soilers  held  on  January  seventh, 
1851,  Sumner  was  unanimously  nominated  for  Senator  for  the 
long  term.  E.  L.  Keys,  in  communicating  the  result  to  him, 
wrote :  "  We  have  sworn  to  stand  by  you,  to  sink  or  swim  with 
you,  at  all  hazards.  If  you  shall  fail  us  in  any  respect,  may  God 
forgive  you : — we  never  shall."  The  Daily  Commonwealth,  the 
organ  of  the  Free-Soilers  in  speaking  of  the  reason  for  this 
selection  for  Senator,  said :  "  Mr.  Sumner  was  selected  as  the 
candidate  for  the  Senate,  because,  while  true  as  the  truest  to 
Free-Soil  principles,  he  was  supposed  to  be  less  obnoxious  than 
any  other  prominent  Free-Soiler  in  the  State  to  the  Democratic 
party.  He  was  never  identified  with  any  of  the  measures  of  the 
Whig  party,  except  to  sustain  the  sentiment,  not  of  the  Whig 
party  alone,  but  of  Massachusetts,  against  the  annexation  of 
Texas  and  the  Mexican  War." 

After  the  nominations  were  made,  the  Legislature  proceeded 
to  a  choice,  electing  George  S.  Boutwell,  Governor;  Henry  W. 
Cushman,  Lieutenant-Governor  and  Eobert  Eantoul,  Senator 
for  the  short  term,  all  Democrats,  according  to  the  previous 
agreement.  On  the  fourteenth  of  January,  the  House  voted 
for  Senator,  for  the  long  term;  whole  number  of  votes,  381, 
necessary  to  a  choice,  191,  Charles  Sumner  186,  E.  C.  Win- 
throp  167,  scattering  28,  blanks  3.  A  second  ballot  was  taken 
the  same  day,  with  the  same  result.  Sumner  had  all  the  Free- 
Soil  votes,  110,  and  76  Democratic  votes.  The  Free-Soilers 
insisted  that  they  had  taken  the  candidates  of  the  Democrats 
without  pledge  and  without  question  and  that  having  selected 
their  own  candidate,  they  would  never  desert  him.  On  Jan 
uary  twenty-second,  the  Senate  elected  Sumner :  whole  number 
of  votes  38,  necessary  to  a  choice  20,  for  Charles  Sumner  23, 
for  Eobert  C.  Winthrop  14,  for  Henry  W.  Bishop  1.  The  only 
question  that  now  remained  was,  whether  Sumner  could  get 
enough  votes  in  the  House  to  elect  him. 

The  anger  of  the  Free-Soilers  at  their  desertion  by  the  House 


22S  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Democrats  was  hardly  concealed.  They  had  carried  out,  to  the 
letter,  the  arrangement  on  their  part,  and  at  the  crucial  point, 
they  had  been  deserted  by  their  Democratic  allies.  Some  were 
for  renouncing  all  farther  communication  with  them  and  ar 
ranging  for  an  alliance  with  the  Whigs  to  run  the  Democrats 
out,  the  next  year;  others  were  for  the  resignation  of  every 
fruit  of  the  alliance  thus  far  gathered  by  the  Free-Soilers ;  others 
still  were  for  demanding  of  Governor  Boutwell  and  his  Demo 
cratic  colleagues  the  surrender  of  the  offices  they  had  acquired 
by  the  coalition.  But  the  more  sturdy  leaders,  with  cooler 
heads  and  greater  steadiness  of  purpose,  like  Henry  Wilson, 
were  determined  not  to  break  with  their  allies,  but  hold  them  to 
their  promises  and  meanwhile  insist  that  they  had  made  choice 
of  their  candidate  and  would  adhere  to  him,  to  the  end,  and 
would  have  no  other.  They  knew  that  all  their  allies  were  not 
unfaithful  and  that  those  that  were  steadfast,  ought  not  to  be 
charged  with  the  faults  of  the  faithless.  These  counsels  finally 
prevailed  and  for  more  than  three  months,  they  steadily  refused 
to  hear  any  proposition  of  surrender  or  compromise.  They 
freely  said  and  firmly  insisted  that  Sumner  was  their  first,  last 
and  only  choice. 

The  ballots  were  taken,  sometimes  more  than  one  on  the  same 
day  and  sometimes  with  intervals  of  weeks.  There  were  twenty- 
six  in  all,  in  the  House.  Sometimes  Sumner  was  within  one 
vote  of  an  election  and  again  he  lacked  as  many  as  twelve.  As 
the  contest  dragged  its  weary  length  along,  both  sides  became 
tired  of  it,  but  neither  would  yield.  The  Free-Soilers  felt  that 
they  were  only  asking  their  right  and  that  having  chosen  their 
candidate,  with  due  reference  to  his  acceptability  to  the  Demo 
crats,  they  ought  not  to  yield.  The  ee  Hunker  "  Democrats,  or 
"  Indomitables,"  as  they  were  called,  who  had  thus  far  refused 
to  vote  for  Sumner,  saw  the  folly  of  their  position  and  that  they 
ought  not  to  have  taken  it,  but  did  not  like  to  recede.  They 
offered  to  compromise  on  any  other  man  and  named  Wilson. 
He  promptly  declined. 

The  opposition  among  the  Democrats  was  led  by  Caleb  Gush 
ing.  He  had  been  present  at  the  caucus  of  his  party  and  had 
voted  to  abide  by  the  candidate  for  whom  two-third-s  would 
vote.  Sumner  having  received  more  than  that  number,  Gushing 
had  then  joined  another  caucus  called  to  oppose  his  election  on 
the  ground  that  the  choice  of  so  pronounced  an  anti-slavery 
man  would  injure  their  standing  with  the  national  organization 
of  their  party.  He  called  Sumner  "  a  one-ideaed  abolition 
agitator."  Later  in  the  canvass,  when  his  followers  faltered 
and  Sumner's  election  seemed  probable,  he  sought  to  escape 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  229 

from  his  position  by  asking  of  him  a  pledge  that,  if  elected,  he 
would  not  give  undue  prominence  in  the  Senate,  to  the  slavery 
question.  But  Sumner  declined  to  give  any  such  pledge  and 
also  declined  to  have  any  communication  with  Gushing  about 
politics. 

To  a  friend  who  asked  him  to  write  something  he  could  use 
to  quiet  the  charge  that  he  was  a  Disunionist,  Surnner  wrote 
"  You  know  well  that  I  do  not  seek  or  desire  any  political  office, 
that  I  am  not  voluntarily  in  my  present  position  as  candidate, 
and  that  prescribing  to  myself  the  rule  of  non-intervention,  I 
have  constantly  declined  doing  anything  to  promote  my  elec 
tion,  and  have  refused  pledges  or  explanations  with  regard  to 
my  future  course  beyond  what  are  implied  in  my  past  life,  my 
published  speeches  and  my  character." 

The  Whig  papers  did  everything  they  could  to  aid  their  party, 
in  the  Senate  and  House,  to  prevent  his  election.  They  hurled 
almost  every  epithet  at  the  coalition  of  the  Democrats  and 
Free-Soilers  and  insisted  that  such  a  bargain  and  sale  of  the 
offices  as  had  been  made  was  an  indictable  offence  and  ought  to 
be  so  punished.  They  published  extracts  from  Sumner's 
speeches,  prominently  printed  with  hostile  comments,  almost 
daily.  His  speeches  were  charged  with  being  "  treasonable  "  and 
himself  as  being  a  "  disunionist ".  The  Whigs  believed  that  if 
an  election  could  be  prevented,  by  this  Legislature,  the  next 
year  would  enable  them  to  recover  the  State  and  choose  a  Sena 
tor  from  their  own  party  and  part  of  their  plan  was  to  encour 
age  the  House  to  hold  out  in  its  opposition  to  Sumner.  Even 
the  Democratic  press  was  not  friendly  to  him.  The  editor  of 
the  Times  called  upon  him  and  asked  him  to  modify  some  of 
his  utterances  on  the  slavery  question,  especially  in  his  recent 
Faneuil  Hall  speech,  on  "Our  Immediate  Anti-Slavery 
Duties."  This  he  declined  to  do.  The  editor  then  asked  him 
how  he  would  like  to  have  that  speech  printed,  so  that  it  might 
be  read  by  the  members  of  the  Legislature.  Sumner  replied 
that  nothing  would  give  him  greater  pleasure.  It  accordingly 
appeared  the  next  day  in  the  Times,  with  this  comment : 

"  Mr.  Sumner  avows  that  what  is  called  his  Faneuil  Hall 
speech  contains  his  calm,  deliberately  formed,  and  well  matured 
opinions — opinions  by  which  his  actions  would  be  governed  in 
the  event  of  his  election  to  the  office  of  United  States  Senator. 
*  *  *  We  hope  that  every  Democratic  member  of  the  Legis 
lature  will  read  the  speech  of  the  man  for  whom  they  are  asked 
to  vote,  and  then  consider  whether  it  is  not  their  duty  to  vote 
for  some  other  person." 

The  Commonwealth,  the  Free-Soil  organ,  then  printed  it  with 


230  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  defiant  introduction :  "  We  treat  our  readers  to-day  to  the 
noble  speech  of  Charles  Sumner  at  that  great  "  treasonable  " 
meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall.  We  are  proud  of  it  and  of  the  man 
who  made  it.  We  give  it  as  it  was  reported  by  Dr.  Stone  for 
the  Traveller,  and  as  it  was  copied  into  the  Times.  The 
apologists  for  slavery  have  heaped  abuse  on  Mr.  Sumner  for 
this  speech,  and  garbled  it  to  serve  their  base  purposes;  but 
here  it  stands.  Not  a  glorious  word  of  it  shall  be  rubbed  out. 
We  ask  any  member  of  the  Legislature,  whatever  may  be  his 
politics  or  party,  as  a  man,  as  a  son  of  New  England,  and  as  an 
admirer  of  Washington,  Jefferson,  Patrick  Henry,  John  Han 
cock  and  Samuel  Adams,  to  read  this  speech,  and  tell  us  how 
he  can  do  a  better  thing  than  to  vote  for  its  author  next  Wed 
nesday.  Here  you  have  the  intellect  and  heart  of  a  man — a 
man  for  the  times,  a  man  for  Massachusetts !  " 

A  little  later,  closing  an  appeal  to  the  Free-Soilers  to  stand 
firmly  by  their  choice,  the  Commonwealth  said :  "  One  pecul 
iarity  attending  this  election  is,  that  it  involves  a  true  issue 
of  principle.  *  *  *  The  election  of  such  a  man  as  Charles  Sum 
ner  in  the  room  of  such  a  man  as  Daniel  Webster  may  be  con 
strued  to  be  quite  as  much  a  complete  disavowal  of  the  late 
conduct  of  the  one  as  a  sanction  of  the  system  advocated  by  the 
other.  Herein  it  is  not  difficult  to  trace  the  real  causes  as  well 
of  the  extraordinary  opposition  on  the  one  side  as  of  the  tena 
cious  adherence  on  the  other." 

Sumner  himself  as  the  weeks  rolled  away  and  ballot  after 
ballot  was  taken,  with  still  no  election,  despaired  of  success 
and  fearing  that  the  Free-Soilers,  by  persisting  in  voting  for 
him  alone,  as  their  candidate,  and  refusing  to  consider  any 
proposition  for  a  change,  were  emperilling  their  prospect  of 
success  and,  perhaps,  sacrificing  all  the  fruits  of  their  hard- 
earned  victory,  wrote  to  Wilson,  February  22,  1851 :  "  Early  in 
life  I  formed  a  determination  never  to  hold  any  political  office, 
and,  of  course,  never  to  be  a  candidate  for  any.  My  hope  was 
(might  I  so  aspire!)  to  show,  that,  without  its  titles  or  emolu 
ments,  something  might  be  done  for  the  good  of  my  fellow-men. 
Notwithstanding  the  strength  of  this  determination  often  de 
clared,  I  have,  by  the  confidence  of  the  friends  of  Freedom  in 
Boston,  more  than  once  been  pressed  into  the  position  of  can 
didate;  and  now  by  the  nomination  of  the  Free-Soil  and  Demo 
cratic  members  of  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  contrary  to 
desires,  specially  made  known  to  all,  who  communicated  with 
me  on  the  subject,  I  have  been  brought  forward  as  their  can 
didate  for  the  Senate  of  the  United  States." 

"  Pardon  me,  if  I  say,  that  personal  regrets  mingle  with 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  231 

gratitude  for  the  honor  done  me.  The  office  of  Senator,  though 
elevated  and  important,  is  to  me  less  attractive  than  other  and 
more  quiet  fields.  Besides  there  are  members  of  our  party,  to 
whom  I  gladly  defer  as  representatives  of  the  principles  we 
have  at  heart." 

"  I  trust  therefore  that  the  friends  of  Freedom  in  the  Legis 
lature  will  not,  on  any  ground  of  delicacy  towards  me  hesitate 
to  transfer  their  support  to  some  other  candidate,  faithful  to 
our  cause.  In  this  matter,  I  pray  you,  do  not  think  of  me.  I 
have  no  political  prospects  which  I  desire  to  nurse.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  political  field  which  I  covet.  Abandon  me,  then, 
whenever  you  think  best  without  notice  or  apology.  The  cause 
is  everything ;  I  am  nothing." 

Sumner  asked  Wilson  to  communicate  the  contents  of  this 
letter,  in  some  proper  way,  to  the  Free-Soil  members  of  the 
Legislature;  which  he  did.  But  there  was  a  feeling  among 
them,  that  he  better  represented  their  cause  than  any  one  else, 
that  he  was  really  more  acceptable  to  the  Democrats  than  any 
one  they  could  name  and  that  to  abandon  him  now  would  be 
half  a  confession  of  defeat.  They  also  knew  that,  with  his 
courage  and  power  of  speech,  he  was  best  qualified  to  stand  for 
them  in  the  Senate.  They,  therefore,  resolved  to  persevere. 
Wilson  and  his  colleagues  could  see  that  the  "  Indomitables  " 
were  hardly  longer  indomitable  and  that  they  were  already 
seeking  an  escape  from  their  position,  that  to  hold  on  just  a 
little  longer  must,  in  all  probability,  result  in  success.  A  clause, 
in  the  Bill  of  Eights  of  the  constitution  of  Massachusetts, 
allowed  the  people  to  meet  in  mass  convention  and  instruct 
their  Representatives  how  to  vote.  In  some  instances  this  was 
done,  the  only  occasion  when  this  right  was  ever  known  to  be 
exercised.  This  furnished  some  of  the  opposition  a  pretext  for 
changing  their  votes.  Others,  seeing  the  risk  to  hold  out  to  the 
close  of  the  session  and  go  before  the  people  for  re-election,  with 
this  record,  after  the  pledges  that  had  been  made,  the  Free- 
Soilers  being  ready  to  unite  with  the  Whigs  to  compass  their 
defeat,  were  glad  to  escape  from  their  position ;  and  so  on  one 
pretext  or  another  the  "  Indomitables  "  found  their  way  into 
the  ranks. 

On  April  twenty-third,  another  ballot  was  taken, — the  eight 
eenth.  The  result  was  announced :  whole  number  of  votes  387, 
necessary  to  a  choice  194;  Charles  Sumner  194,  Robert  C.  Win- 
throp  167,  scattering  26.  On  the  announcement  it  appeared 
that  Sumner  was  elected  and,  for  a  few  minutes,  the  rejoicing 
of  his  supporters  was  unbounded.  But  the  correctness  of  the 
count  was  challenged.  One  ballot  that  had  Sumner's  name 


232  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

printed  upon  it,  had  also  the  name  of  John  Mills  written  upon 
it,  in  pencil,  below  his.  The  opposition  insisted,  that  it  should 
be  counted  for  Mills  and  not  thrown  out  as  it  had  been,  thus 
making  one  more  vote  necessary  to  a  choice.  Three  other 
ballots  were  taken  the  same  day,  with  the  same  result,  Sum- 
ner  each  time  lacking  one  vote  of  an  election.  The  Free-Soilers 
were  on  tiptoe  with  excitement;  they  felt  that  success  was  at 
hand,  and  still  they  were  afraid  to  rejoice.  Success  had  seemed 
within  their  reach  so  often  and  yet  it  had  so  far  eluded  their 
grasp ! 

On  April  twenty-fourth  another  ballot  was  taken,  without 
success.  Sumner  was  two  votes  short.  At  this  stage  Sidney 
Bartlett,  a  Whig,  moved  that  thereafter  the  voters  be  required 
to  place  their  ballots  in  separate  envelopes,  that  the  envelopes 
should  all  be  uniform,  that  where  two  votes  should  be  found 
in  the  same  envelope,  if  for  the  same  person  only  one  should 
be  counted,  if  for  different  persons  both  should  be  thrown 
out.  The  members  had  previously  been  required  to  give  their 
votes  while  passing  in  front  of  the  Speaker's  chair,  their  names 
being  called  and  checked  when  they  deposited  their  ballot.  The 
purpose  of  the  motion  was  thought  to  be  to  secure  changes 
against  Sumner;  but  it  had  the  contrary  effect.  Being  secret, 
it  enabled  some  persons,  without  being  known,  to  vote  for 
Sumner.  Perhaps  they  were  Whigs,  perhaps  Indomitables, — 
just  who,  was  never  known,  though  different  claims  have  since 
been  made  for  the  distinction.  The  result  announced  was: 
whole  number  of  votes  384,  necessary  to  a  choice  193,  Charles 
Sumner  193,  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  166,  scattering  25.  Thus 
on  that  day  nearly  four  months  after  the  voting  commenced 
and  on  the  twenty-sixth  ballot,  in  the  House,  Sumner  was 
elected  Senator. 

It  was  a  notable  election;  a  struggle  for  the  seat  of  Daniel 
Webster,  in  the  Senate,  while  he  was  still  living,  upon  an  issue 
which  was  already  dividing  the  country,  and  drawn  out  by  its 
closeness  for  weary  weeks  and  months !  It  attracted  general 
attention.  The  dignity  with  which  Sumner  bore  himself 
through  it  and  his  constant  refusal  to  make  any  promise  or 
pledge  or  to  modify  his  previously  expressed  opinions,  though 
votes  were  offered  in  exchange,  raised  the  people's  estimate  of 
him.  To  a  Democrat  who  had  called  upon  him  for  this  purpose, 
he  said :  "  If  by  walking  across  my  office  I  could  secure  the 
Senatorship,  I  would  not  take  a  step."  He  was  not  to  be 
swerved  by  self  interest.  This  sentiment  found  a  response 
among  the  plain  people.  It  can  fairly  be  concluded  now  that 
any  other  course  would  have  lost  him  votes.  His  power  was  in 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  233 

his  leadership  of  a  conscience  party.  No  sacrifice  of  principle 
for  votes  could  have  strengthened  that  leadership.  So  without 
sacrifice  of  conviction  and  without  pledges  other  than  were  to 
be  implied  from  his  past  life,  Sumner  came  to  the  office  of 
Senator. 

But  it  must  not  be  inferred  that  he  had  been  indifferent  to 
the  result.  As  we  have  seen  he  met  his  supporters  in  caucus 
more  than  once,  and  was  at  all  times  during  the  contest  ready 
to  give  them  his  advice.  But  his  position  was  that  the  cause 
was  everything;  while  he  was  nothing, — that  no  mere  personal 
ambition  should  be  allowed  to  interfere  with  its  success, — that 
all  should  unite  and  work  and,  if  need  be,  sacrifice  for  it. 

The  result  was  received  with  various  feelings.  Most  of  the 
members  of  the  House  were  tired  and  glad  to  have  the  long  con 
test  ended,  many  of  the  Free-Soilers  were  jubilant,  seeing  in 
this  unusual  victory  an  earnest  of  something  to  be  done  to  check 
the  onward  march  of  Slavery;  others  still  were  questioning. 
It  was  a  new  departure  in  the  politics  of  Massachusetts. 
Would  it  bring  the  same  honor  and  renown  to  the  Common 
wealth  that  Webster  and  his  party  had  done?  Time  showed. 
It  marked  the  closing  of  the  period,  when  love  of  the  Union  and 
compromises  for  its  support  predominated  under  the  great 
leadership  of  Webster;  and  it  marked  the  beginning  of  the 
period  of  the  Civil  War  when  men  believed  that  compromise 
could  be  carried  too  far — that  Union  and  Universal  Freedom 
ought  to  be  made  to  stand  together.  With  the  heat  of  battle, 
they  finally  welded  these  two  principles  into  constitutional  law. 

In  the  evening  a  ratification  meeting  was  held  in  State  Street 
at  which  speeches  were  made  by  Henry  Wilson,  Joseph  Lyman 
and  Thomas  Russell.  After  the  meeting  the  crowd  marched 
to  Sumner's  house,  but  he  had  left  the  city.  It  then  proceeded 
to  the  home  of  Charles  Francis  Adams  who  addressed  them. 
They  afterwards  went  in  a  body  to  the  home  of  R.  H.  Dana  Jr. 
who  being  absent,  was  represented  by  his  father.  He  said  that 
he  had  "  kept  his  bed  until  noon  through  illness ;  but  on  learn 
ing  the  news  of  the  election  of  Mr.  Sumner  he  suddenly  be 
came  better." 

Sumner  first  heard  the  news,  while  dining  at  the  house  of 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  in  Mt.  Vernon  Street  within  a  minute's 
walk  of  the  State  House.  He  was  very  intimate  with  the  family 
and  dined  with  them,  on  an  average  as  often  as  once  a  week. 
He  had  been  there  the  day  before,  when  his  election  was  an 
nounced  and  the  ballot  afterwards  being  corrected,  left  him  one 
short  of  a  majority.  Knowing  that  another  ballot  would  be 
taken  on  the  twenty-fourth,  and  that  the  result  must  be  very 


234:  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

close,  he  came  there  again,  so  that  he  with  Adams  might 
promptly  hear  the  result.  A  little  son  of  Mr.  Adams'  brought 
them  the  news,  about  three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  while  they 
were  dining;  and  another  son,  then  about  sixteen  years  of  age, 
seated  beside  Mr.  Sumner  at  the  table  was  the  first  to  con 
gratulate  him.  He  did  not  seem  at  all  elated,  or  show  any  sign 
of  rejoicing.  In  a  few  minutes  a  number  of  friends,  learning 
he  was  there  called  to  offer  their  congratulations  and  were  re 
ceived  in  the  library.  A  proposition  to  have  a  public  demon 
stration,  at  his  own  home  in  the  evening,  he  put  aside,  being 
unwilling  that  a  victory  for  a  cause  should  assume  any  ap 
pearance  of  a  personal  triumph. 

He  soon  left  the  house  and  the  city,  going  to  Longfellow's 
home  in  Cambridge  where  he  passed  the  evening,  with  him  and 
Palfrey  and  Lowell,  and  spent  the  night,  away  from  the  excite 
ment  caused  by  his  election.  In  his  diary  of  that  day,  Long 
fellow  wrote  of  Sumner :  "  He  is  no  more  elated  by  his  success 
than  he  has  been  depressed  by  the  failure  heretofore  and  evi 
dently  does  not  desire  the  office."  Sumner,  in  fact,  mistrusted 
his  ability  to  meet  the  expectations  of  his  friends  and  to  dis 
charge  the  duties  of  the  office,  according  to  his  own  ideal.  What 
if  he  should  fail,  after  all  the  hopes  that  had  been  held  out  by 
his  party  to  the  people !  To  a  young  friend  who  said  to  him ; 
"  This  is  too  good ;  I  fear  you  will  die  before  taking  your  seat;  " 
Sumner  thoughtfully  replied,  "  Perhaps  that  will  be  the  best 
thing  for  me/' 

To  John  Bigelow,  then  associated  with  Bryant  on  the  New 
York  Evening  Post,  he  wrote :  "  Every  heart  knoweth  its  own 
secret,  and  mine  has  never  been  in  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  nor  is  it  there  yet.  Most  painfully  do  I  feel  my  inability 
to  meet  the  importance  which  has  been  given  to  this  election 
and  the  expectation  of  enthusiastic  friends,  but  more  than  this, 
I  am  impressed  by  the  thought  that  I  now  embark  on  a  career, 
which  promises  to  last  for  six  years,  if  not  indefinitely,  and 
which  takes  from  me  all  opportunity  of  study  and  meditation 
to  which  I  had  hoped  to  devote  myself.  I  do  not  wish  to  be  a 
politician." 

But  his  friends  refused  to  participate  in  his  misgivings.  The 
newspapers  in  commenting  upon  his  election,  recognized  the 
independence  of  his  position  in  the  Senate,  unfettered  as  he 
would  be  by  pledges  and  promises.  The  London  Times,  in  a 
leader,  interpreted  the  election  of  Sumner,  "the  most  active 
and  able  representative  "  of  the  cause  of  the  Free-Soilers,  as 
showing  the  strength  of  feeling  in  Massachusetts  against  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  as  an  emphatic  declaration  that  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  235 

law  at  least  in  its  existing  form,  was  not  to  remain  unassailed, 
Congratulations  came  to  him  from  every  side, — from  Bryant, 
Bigelow,  Epes  Sargent  and  Neal  Dow;  from  Chase,  Giddings, 
Jay  and  Burritt.  John  G.  Whittier  wrote :  "  I  rejoice  that 
unpledged,  free  and  without  a  single  concession  or  compromise 
thou  art  enabled  to  take  thy  place  in  the  Senate.  I  never  knew 
such  a  feeling  of  real  heart  pleasure  and  satisfaction  as  is  mani 
fested  by  all  except  inveterate  Hunkers  in  view  of  thy  election. 
The  whole  country  is  electrified  by  it.  Sick  abed,  I  heard  the 
guns,  Quaker  as  I  am,  with  real  satisfaction/'  John  Van  Buren 
wrote :  "  I  was  as  much  pleased  with  seeing  your  frank  as  I  was 
with  the  inside  of  your  note.  Independent  of  the  fact  that  it 
proves  your  election  to  the  United  States  Senate,  the  inscrip 
tion  '  Free.  Charles  Sumner,'  seems  to  me  mighty  pretty  read 
ing." 

Sumner  gratefully  acknowledged  the  assistance  of  his 
friends.  Henry  Wilson  especially  had  been  unwearied  in  his 
efforts.  He  was  chiefly  instrumental  in  bringing  about  a 
coalition  with  the  Democrats  to  secure  the  election  of  members 
of  the  Senate  and  House,  and  after  the  election  he  had  been  no 
less  diligent  in  holding  the  Democrats  to  their  pledges  of  sup 
port.  He  possessed  large  capacity  for  organization  and  a  cool 
head  as  well  as  an  honest  heart.  In  the  darkest  days  of  the 
struggle  he  never  despaired.  When  others  were  ready  to  give 
up  and  adopt  measures  to  punish  the  recalcitrant  Democrats, 
his  better  judgment  restrained  them.  When  thoughts  of  an 
other  candidate  and  of  a  compromise  were  suggested,  his 
warning  voice  said  :  "  No,  Sumner  is  our  candidate ;  his  choice, 
was  our  right,  and  we  will  have  no  other."  He  was  tireless  in 
his  efforts  and  his  judgment  was  good.  In  this  campaign  he 
developed  the  ability  and  the  traits  of  leadership  which  five 
years  later  made  him  Sumner's  colleague  in  the  Senate.  Writ 
ing  to  him,  on  the  day  after  the  election,  from  Craigie  House, 
Sumner  gratefully  said :  "  To  your  ability,  energy  and  fidelity, 
our  cause  owes  its  present  success.  For  weal  or  woe,  you  must 
take  the  responsibility  of  having  placed  me  in  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States."  And  in  the  same  letter  he  placed  it  upon 
record,  that  all  Wilson  did  was  done  without  the  suggestion  of 
any  selfish  consideration  and  without  any  thought  of  personal 
advancement. 

Having  received  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Commonwealth 
his  certificate  of  election,  Sumner  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  May, 
addressed  to  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  Mass 
achusetts  a  formal  letter  of  acceptance  of  the  office.  In  it  he 
recognized  that  he  owed  his  first  duty  to  the  cause  of  Liberty; 


236  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

but  as  he  had,  during  the  contest  been  charged  with  being  a  Dis- 
unionist  and  a  Sectionalism  he  took  this  occasion  to  correct  the 
false  impression  that  had  been  sought  to  be  given  out  by  his  op 
ponents.  He  declared  himself  in  favor  of  the  Union  and  against 
any  effort  to  destroy  it  and  as  opposed  to  all  sectionalism 
whether  of  the  North  to  carry  Freedom  into  the  Slave  States,  or 
of  the  South  to  carry  the  evils  of  slavery  into  the  Free  States  or 
the  sectional  domination  of  slavery  over  the  National  Govern 
ment.  He  declared  his  belief  in  a  Union  so  firm  that  no  part 
could  be  permanently  lost  from  its  well-compacted  whole  and 
that  it  could  be  separable  only  by  a  crash  which  would  destroy 
the  whole.  He  bespoke  the  candid  judgment  of  his  constituents 
to  promote  the  general  welfare,  assuring  them  that  true  politics 
and  right  which  are  a  law  alike  to  individuals  and  communities 
are  the  same  for  the  lowly  and  the  great. 

Referring  more  directly  to  the  office,  he  said :  "  The  trust 
conferred  on  me  is  one  of  the  most  weighty  which  a  citizen  can 
receive.  It  concerns  the  grandest  interests  of  our  own  Com 
monwealth,  and  also  of  the  Union  in  which  we  are  an  indissol- 
uable  link.  Like  every  post  of  eminent  duty,  it  is  a  post  of 
eminent  honor.  A  personal  ambition,  such  as  I  cannot  con- 
fess,  might  be  satisfied  to  possess  it.  But  when  I  think  what 
it  requires,  I  am  obliged  to  say  that  its  honors  are  all  eclipsed 
by  its  duties." 

"  Your  appointment  finds  me  in  a  private  station,  with  which 
I  am  entirely  content.  For  the  first  time  in  my  life  I  am  called 
to  political  office.  With  none  of  the  experience  possessed  by 
others  to  smooth  the  way  of  labor,  I  might  well  hesitate.  But 
I  am  cheered  by  the  generous  confidence  which,  throughout  a 
lengthened  contest,  persevered  in  sustaining  me,  and  by  the 
conviction,  that,  amidst  all  seeming  differences  of  party,  the 
sentiments  of  which  I  am  the  known  advocate,  and  which  led 
to  my  original  selection  as  a  candidate,  are  dear  to  the  hearts 
of  the  people  throughout  this  Commonwealth.  I  derive,  also, 
a  most  grateful  consciousness  of  personal  independence  from  the 
circumstance,  which  I  deem  it  frank  and  proper  thus  pub 
licly  to  disclose  and  place  on  record,  that  this  office  comes  to 
me  unsought  and  undesired. 

"  Acknowledging  the  right  of  my  country  to  the  services  of 
her  sons  wherever  she  chooses  to  place  them  and  with  a  heart 
full  of  gratitude  that  a  sacred  cause  is  permitted  to  triumph 
through  me,  I  now  accept  the  post  of  Senator." 


CHAPTER  XIX 

REGRETS  AT  LEAVING  BOSTON — FIRST  DAYS  AT  WASHINGTON  AND 
IN  THE  SENATE WELCOME  TO  KOSSUTH — AID  TO  RAIL 
ROADS  IN  IOWA EULOGY  ON  RANTOUL ANXIETY  TO  BE 

HEARD    ON    SLAVERY SECJJRES    A    HEARING THE    SPEECH, 

"  FREEDOM,         NATIONAL  ;        SLAVERY,         SECTIONAL  " HIS 

BROTHER      GEORGE       RETURNS       FROM       EUROPE SUMNER^S 

VACATION — TAKES   NO   PART  IN  CAMPAIGN 

IN  the  campaign  of  1851,  the  same  coalition  was  made  be 
tween  the  Free-Soilers  and  Democrats,  as  had  been  made  the 
previous  year  and  with  similar  results.  The  Legislature,  both 
House  and  Senate,  were  again  in  the  control  of  the  coalitions, 
but  the  majorities  were  not  so  large  as  they  had  been  the  prev 
ious  year.  Some  congressional  districts  were  lost,  where  the 
coalition  had  before  elected  their  candidates.  The  first  use 
Sumner  made  of  his  frank  was  in  distributing  documents,  to 
promote  the  re-election  of  John  G.  Palfrey  to  Congress.  But 
Palfrey  was  defeated.  Sumner  did  not  do  so  much  speaking 
as  he  had  done  the  previous  year.  He  was  busy  making  prep 
aration  for  his  removal  to  Washington,  by  putting  his  affairs 
at  home  in  such  shape  that  they  would  not  suffer  by  his  ab 
sence.  Besides,  he  did  not  wish  to  have  another  contest  with 
Winthrop  who  was  still  taking  part  in  politics  though  defeated 
for  election  to  the  Senate.  Sumner  entertained  for  him  per 
sonally  a  kindly  feeling  and  sincerely  regretted  his  political 
course.  To  carry  a  personal  controversy  further,  after  the 
events  of  the  last  year,  might  seem  like  seeking  a  quarrel  for  its 
own  sake,  than  which  nothing  could  have  been  farther  from 
Sumner. 

He  wished  that  Winthrop  might  still  be  induced  to  join  the 
anti-slavery  movement,  where  his  ability  and  his  popularity 
would  have  found  a  wide  field  for  usefulness.  But  this  was 
destined  never  to  be.  Winthrop  had  gone  too  far  now,  to  be 
willing  to  retrace  his  steps,  he  had  been  prominent  as  a  Whig 
and  his  opinions  had  been  given  such  wide  publication  that  they 
could  only  be  retracted  with  some  sacrifice  of  personal  pride; 
besides  others  had  the  places  he  coveted.  To  join  the  new 
party  would  seem  like  commencing  his  political  life  over  again. 
It  was  a  source  of  regret,  to  his  friends,  that  he  was  not  induced 

237 


238  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

to  make  the  sacrifice  so  that  a  new  and,  perhaps,  larger  career 
might  have  been  opened  to  him.  Sumner  did  not  forget  his 
many  good  qualities.  He  hoped  that  friendly  feelings  would 
yet  prevail  between  them.  He  was  always  disposed  to  look 
charitably  on  his  political  antagonists  and,  while  tenacious  of 
his  convictions,  he  did  not  believe  that  they  should  interfere 
Avith  private  friendships.  And  besides  the  weight  of  social 
ostracism,  he  was  often  made  by  others  to  feel,  during  his 
long  career,  made  him  careful  not  to  do  the  same  injustice 
to  others. 

He  went  to  Washington  the  week  before  Congress  opened. 
In  leaving  Boston  there  were  three  separations  he  felt  keenly, 
— from  his  mother  and  sister  at  the  old  home,  from  the  Long- 
fellows  at  Cambridge  and  from  the  Howes,  at  the  Blind 
Asylum.  Many  were  the  happy  hours  he  had  passed  in  these 
quiet  places,  where  love  and  sympathy  had  never  failed  him. 
When  others  had  insisted  on  misconstruing  his  efforts  against 
slavery,  had  snubbed  him  in  public,  and  privately  closed  their 
doors  against  him,  he  always  found  these  places  of  retreat  open. 
His  quiet  home,  with  the  books  he  loved,  his  frequent  evenings 
with  the  Howes,  his  Sunday  dinners  at  Longfellow's,  with  the 
congenial  talk  and  companionship,  the  joyful  part  of  his 
bachelor  life, — these  things  had  formed  ties  whose  strength  he 
did  not  appreciate,  until  they  were  about  to  be  broken.  The 
thought  of  the  separation  made  him  sad. 

From  New  York  he  wrote  to  Howe :  "  Three  times  yesterday 
I  wept  like  a  child, — I  could  not  help  it;  first  in  parting  with 
Longfellow,  next  in  parting  with  you,  and  lastly  as  I  left  my 
mother  and  sister.  I  stand  now  on  the  edge  of  a  great  change. 
In  the  vicissitudes  of  life  I  cannot  see  the  future;  but  I  know 
that  I  now  move  away  from  those  who  have  been  more  than 
brothers  to  me.  My  soul  is  wrung  and  my  eyes  are  bleared  with 
tears.  God  bless  you  ever  and  ever,  my  noble,  well-tried,  and 
eternally  dear  friend !  " 

To  Longfellow  he  wrote :  "  I  could  not  speak  to  you  as  we 
parted,  my  soul  was  too  full;  only  tears  would  flow.  Your 
friendship  and  dear  Fanny's  have  been  among  my  few  treas 
ures,  like  gold  unchanging.  For  myself  I  see  with  painful 
vividness  the  vicissitudes  and  enthrallments  of  the  future,  and 
feel  that  we  shall  never  more  know  each  other  as  in  times  past. 
Those  calm  days  and  nights  of  overflowing  communion  are 
gone.  Thinking  of  them  and  of  what  I  lose  I  become  a  child 
again.  From  a  grateful  heart  I  now  thank  you  for  your  true 
and  constant  friendship.  Whatever  may  be  in  store  for  me,  so 
much  at  least  is  secure ;  and  the  memory  of  you  and  Fanny  will 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  239 

be  to  me  a  precious  fountain.  God  bless  you  both,  ever  dear 
friends,  faithful  and  good !  Be  happy  and  think  kindly  of  me." 

A  little  later  Longfellow  answered :  "  Your  farewell  note 
came  safe  and  sad ;  and  on  Sunday  no  well-known  footsteps  in 
the  hall,  nor  sound  of  cane  laid  upon  the  table.  We  ate  our 
dinner  somewhat  silently  by  ourselves,  and  talked  of  you  far 
off,  looking  at  your  empty  chair." 

One  source  of  Sumner's  feeling  of  loneliness  at  parting  from 
these  home  friends  was  the  untried  future  that  stretched  out 
before  him  and  the  dread  of  his  responsibilities.  Daniel  Web- 
sters,  from  his  place  in  the  Senate,  had  occupied  a  large  meas 
ure  of  public  attention.  His  massive  eloquence  would  have 
attracted  attention  anywhere.  And  yet  Sumner  had  succeeded 
after  a  short  interval,  to  his  place,  by  a  contest,  in  which  Web 
ster  and  his  friends  were  defeated.  Naturally  Sumner  would 
be  contrasted  with  him.  Every  effort  he  was  to  put  forth 
for  the  cause  he  represented  must  be  made  before  an  audience 
utterly  unsympathetic.  The  leader  of  the  New  England  anti- 
slavery  men  could  hope  for  no  sympathy  from  the  United 
States  Senate  in  his  effort  for  this  cause.  And  yet  the  cause 
was  the  very  one  he  was  commissioned  to  represent.  No  one 
had  blazed  the  way  for  him.  John  Quincy  Adams  and  Joshua 
E.  Giddings  had  been  pioneers  in  that  work  in  the  House,  but 
it  may  fairly  be  said  there  was  none  before  Sumner  in  the 
Senate. 

When  he  took  his  seat,  on  the  first  day  of  December,  1851, 
the  only  two  Free-Soilers  in  the  Senate  were  Hale  of  New 
Hampshire  and  Chase  of  Ohio,  the  former  elected  by  a 
coalition  of  Free-Soilers  with  Whigs,  and  the  latter  by  a  coali 
tion  of  Free-Soilers  with  Democrats.  Neither  of  them  had 
been  there  long, — Hale,  four  years ;  Chase,  but  two.  Though 
both  were  able  and  earnest  men,  neither  had  acquired  distinc 
tion  for  aggressive  leadership  of  the  anti-slavery  cause  in  the 
Senate.  Seward  was  also  there,  but  he  still  maintained  his 
affiliation  with  the  Whigs.  Wade  entered  the  Senate  the  same 
day  as  Sumner.  The  cause  was  still  in  need  of  an  earnest, 
aggressive  man,  of  singleness  of  purpose,  who  could  attract 
national  attention  and  from  his  place  in  the  Senate  awaken 
the  North  to  a  realization  of  the  enormities  of  slavery 
and  its  aggressions  and  the  dangers  that  lay  in  them  to  the 
country. 

It  is  a  singular  fact  that  as  he  entered  upon  his  duties,  Mr. 
Benton  said  to  him :  "  You  have  come  upon  the  stage  too  late, 
Sir;  all  our  great  men  have  passed  away.  Mr.  Calhoun  and 
Mr.  Clay  and  Mr.  Webster  are  gone.  Not  only  have  the  great 


24.0  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMMER 

men  passed  away,  but  the  great  issues  too,,  raised  from  our  form 
of  government,  and  of  deepest  interest  to  its  founders  and  their 
immediate  descendants,  have  been  settled  also.  The  last  of 
these  was  the  National  Bank,  and  that  has  been  overthrown 
forever.  Nothing  is  left  you,  sir,  but  puny  sectional  questions 
and  petty  strifes  about  slavery  and  fugitive  slave  laws  involving 
no  national  interests." 

What  a  strange  prediction  this  was,  in  the  light  of  subsequent 
history !  And  yet,  perhaps,  it  was  not  a  strange  prediction  for 
one  to  make  then,  who  had  passed  the  thirty  years  prior  in  the 
public  service !  Calhoun  was  dead.  He  had  died  the  year 
previous,  in  Washington,  at  his  post  as  Senator.  Webster  had 
resigned,  a  few  months  before  to  enter  Fillmore's  cabinet,  an 
old  man  worn  out,  destined  to  die  a  year  later.  Clay  was  in  his 
seat,  in  the  Senate  for  the  last  time,  the  day  Sumner  entered. 

They  were  the  giants  of  their  day.  All  gone !  The  National 
issues  of  the  formative  period  of  the  Government  over  which 
they  had  struggled,  were  many  of  them  settled, — Nullification, 
the  constitutionality  of  a  Tariff  and  of  Internal  Improvements. 
The  national  boundaries  had  been  defined  and  new  territory 
had  been  acquired.  But  some  of  the  issues  over  which  they  had 
struggled  and  now  considered  settled,  we  know  were  far  from 
it, — the  perpetuity  of  slavery,  the  right  of  Secession,  the  indis- 
solubility  of  the  Union.  How  such  issues  as  the  Bank,  the 
Tariff  and  Internal  Improvements  dwarf  in  comparison  with 
them.  The  work  of  these  statesmen  should  not  be  belittled. 
They  fostered,  maintained  and  strengthened  the  Government 
until  it  learned  its  own  powers  and  a  great  majority  of  its  peo 
ple  appreciated  its  blessings.  But  the  work  of  the  statesmen  of 
the  succeeding  period, — the  period  commencing  with  the  en 
trance  of  Sumner  and  his  anti-slavery  co-laborers  upon  public 
life, — the  period  of  the  Eebellion,  of  Emancipation  and  Recon 
struction — was  destined  to  be,  beyond  all  comparison,  the  most 
eventful  in  our  history.  And  when  Clay,  the  "  great  compro 
miser  "  with  slavery  went  out  of  the  Senate,  on  that  day  another, 
greater  than  he,  came  in, — a  man  who  knew  no  compromise 
with  slavery,  who  always  fought  his  battles  against  it  to  a  finish, 
and  was  always  for  a  clean  victory  or  a  defeat. 

Sumner  was  conducted  before  the  presiding  officer,  to  take 
the  oath  of  office  by  Lewis  Cass,  his  oldest  personal  acquaint 
ance  among  the  Senators.  Their  friendship  extended  back  to 
the  days  in  Paris,  when  they  had  prepared  for  publication  a 
discussion  of  the  question  of  our  North  Eastern  Boundary, 
then  in  dispute  with  England.  By  a  curious  chance,  Sumner 
chose  for  his  seat  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate,  the  chair  just 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  241 

made  vacant  by  Jefferson  Davis,  when  he  entered  Fillmore's 
cabinet.  It  was  beside  the  seat  of  Chase,  which  fact  led  to  its 
selection,  and  was  immediately  behind  the  seat  of  Butler  of 
South  Carolina,  one  of  the  most  extreme  apologists  of  slavery. 
It  was  on  the  Democratic  side  of  the  floor ;  there  was  no  anti- 
slavery  side  then,  and  Sumner  had  been  elected,  partly  ly 
Democratic  votes.  In  the  distribution  of  appointments  to 
committees,  he  was  placed  at  the  foot  of  two  unimportant  ones, 
— the  committee  on  Revolutionary  Claims  and  the  committee 
on  Roads  and  Canals. 

His  social  reception  at  Washington  was  more  cordial  than  he 
expected.  His  familiarity  all  his  life,  with  intellectual  people, 
his  friendly  manner  and  fondness  for  conversation,  united  with 
a  certain  novelty  in  his  position  in  the  Senate  and  a  reputation 
for  oratory  that  preceeded  him,  assisted  in  opening  a  way  for 
him.  He  was  already  acquainted  with  Chase  and  during  the 
remaining  four  years  of  his  term  they  were  intimate.  He  soon 
became  intimate  with  the  New  York  Senators,  Seward  and 
Fish,  and  their  families.  Even  the  Southern  Senators,  to  his 
surprise  met  him  cordially,  and  with  one  of  them,  at  least, 
Soule,  of  Louisiana,  whom  he  regarded  as  the  most  brilliant 
man  in  the  Senate,  eloquent  even  in  a  language  he  could  not 
speak  distinctly,  he  entered  upon  a  sincere  and  lasting  friend 
ship.  He  also  became  intimate  at  the  French,  English  and 
Spanish  embassies.  His  ability  to  speak  French  and  his  ac 
quaintance  with  the  wife  of  the  Spanish  Ambassador,  a  Boston 
lady,  his  large  acquaintance  in  Europe,  especially  in  England, 
and  his  recollection  of  days  of  travel,  naturally  attracted  him 
to  these  houses.  Since  his  return  from  Europe,  few  foreigners 
of  distinction  had  come  to  Boston,  from  England,  who  did  not 
bring  letters  to  him ;  and  after  he  became  a  Senator  fewer  still 
came  to  Washington  without  meeting  him. 

News  of  his  social  success  in  Washington  was  not  long  in 
reaching  Boston,  where  the  eyes  of  many  were  upon  him. 
There  was  great  fear  with  some,  that  the  attractions  of  society 
and  the  blandishments  of  the  Southern  members  would  seduce 
him  from  the  settled  purpose  of  his  election.  Slavery  had  been 
so  resourceful,  that  Northern  men  had  grown  distrustful  of  the 
ability  of  their  representatives  to  withstand  it.  There  was 
some  foundation  for  this  distrust  and  there  was  much  of  it 
without  foundation.  The  influence  of  the  South  in  Washington 
society  was  greater  than  it  should  have  been ;  but  people  thought 
it  greater  than  it  was.  There  were  good  men,  Giddings, 
Chase,  Hale  and  their  circle  of  friends  over  whom  it  had 
no  power.  Sumner  was  well  on  his  guard  for  it.  He  knew  the 


242  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

work  he  was  sent  to  do,  but  he  thought  he  could  succeed  better 
by  having  a  social  standing  at  the  Capitol,  so  that  he  might 
have  an  opportunity  to  influence  men  by  private  conversation. 
He  felt  he  could  not  acquire  this  acquaintance  and  confidence, 
by  at  once  and  without  hesitation  pitching  into  the  favorite 
opinions  of  his  associates  and  thereby,  perhaps,  making  it  im 
possible  for  him  ever  to  acquire  position  among  them.  He 
preferred  to  gain  their  good  opinion  first. 

Sumner  was  at  this  time  in  the  prime  of  manhood.  He  was 
forty  years  of  age.  The  unshapeliness  and  slenderness  of 
his  youthful  days  had  disappeared  and  his  frame  had  filled  out 
broadly  so  as  to  make  him  tower  like  a  tribune  among  men. 
He  had  not  yet  acquired  the  weight  he  did  in  later  life.  His 
wealth  of  dark  brown  hair,  not  even  tinged  with  gray,  but  worn 
according  to  the  fashion  of  the  time,  a  little  long,  hung  full 
about  his  forehead.  His  clear  blue  eyes  and  open  countenance 
showed  the  enthusiasm  of  young  manhood.  His  mouth  and 
nose  were  large  but  well  shaped  and  his  features  clean  cut, 
showing  lines  of  intelligence,  noble  aspirations  and  thoughtful, 
student-life,  not  yet  graven  by  age  into  furrows.  To  fill  out  a 
face  inclined  to  be  long,  he  wore,  as  he  did  most  of  his  life, 
short  side-whiskers.  His  face  was  otherwise  smoothly  shaved. 
He  always  dressed  in  the  fashion,  but  with  good  taste,  and  was 
scrupulously  clean.  He  was  withal  noticeably  fine  looking, 
bearing  with  him  the  marks  of  a  well-bred,  temperate,  intel 
lectual  man,  absorbed  in  the  purpose  of  his  life,  approaching 
the  earnestness  of  an  enthusiast.  His  friendly  smile,  easily 
.provoked,  seeming  to  invite  others,  his  hearty  laugh,  his 
naturalness,  his  friendly  greeting  won  him  acquaintances  in 
many  directions.  A  leader  of  the  New  England  Abolitionists, 
with  some  reputation  for  eloquence  sent  to  Washington  to 
represent  an  apparently  hopeless  cause,  he  was  the  most  inter 
esting  new  figure  in  the  Senate. 

There  was  from  the  first,  among  his  colleagues  a  good  deal 
of  curiosity  to  hear  him;  and  the  opportunity  was  not  long 
wanting.  The  Hungarian  patriot,  Louis  Kossuth,  had  escaped 
from  Poland  into  Turkey  and  was  there  in  friendly  exile.  The 
President  was  authorized  by  Congress,  at  its  previous  session 
to  employ  a  ship  of  war  to  receive  him  and  his  fellow  exiles 
and  convey  them  to  the  United  States.  One  of  the  best  ships 
of  the  Navy,  the  Mississippi,  was  detailed  for  this  service.  On 
the  homeward  voyage  she  touched  in  England,  where  for  a  few 
weeks,  by  brilliant  speeches,  Kossuth  invoked  the  aid  of  her 
people  for  his  oppressed  country,  and  created  a  great  en 
thusiasm.  The  vessel  was  soon  to  arrive  in  New  York  and  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  213 

question  arose  what  form  his  welcome  should  take.  Mr.  Web 
ster,  the  Secretary  of  State,  thought  that  having  been  invited 
and  brought,  as  the  guest  of  the  nation,  some  Congressional 
recognition  of  the  event  would  be  proper.  Following  this  sug 
gestion,  a  resolution  had  been  introduced  on  the  first  day  of  the 
session,  by  Foote  of  Mississippi  providing  for  his  reception  and 
entertainment;  but  some  objection  being  made  to  its  form,  it 
was  withdrawn.  On  December  eighth,  Mr.  Seward  introduced 
a  resolution  that  "  Congress,  in  the  name  and  on  behalf  of  the 
people  of  the  United  States,  give  to  Louis  Kossuth  a  cordial 
welcome,  to  the  Capitol  and  to  the  country."  An  amendment 
was  moved  to  this  resolution,  that  "while  welcoming  Kossuth 
and  his  associates,  it  was  due  to  candor  to  declare  that  it  was 
not  the  purpose  of  Congress  to  depart  from  the  settled  policy, 
which  forbids  all  interference  with  the  domestic  concerns  of 
other  nations." 

It  was  on  this  resolution  and  amendment  that  Sumner  arose 
to  speak  on  December  ninth,  but  it  being  late  in  the  day,  he 
gave  way  to  a  motion  to  adjourn.  The  consideration  of  the 
resolution  was  resumed  the  next  day  and  Sumner  spoke.  After 
recognizing  the  importance  of  the  resolution  as  calculated  to 
create,  combine  and  inspire  sentiments  for  Freedom  both  in  our 
own  and  foreign  countries,  he  said  he  was  ready  to  vote  for  it, 
without  the  amendment.  He  argued  that  we  could  not  afford 
to  do  things  by  halves,  that  the  invitation  having  in  the  name 
of  Freedom,  been  extended  to  Kossuth  and  the  hearts  of  the 
people,  being  open  to  receive  him,  Congress  could  not  now  turn 
its  back  upon  him.  He  insisted  it  was  a  duty  they  owed,  not 
only  to  the  last  Congress,  but  to  their  guest  himself.  He 
referred  to  the  great  and  brilliant  service  of  Kossuth  for  the 
cause  of  Freedom  and  Equality,  and  said  he  saw  "  in  him  more 
than  in  any  other  living  man  the  power  which  may  be  exerted 
by  a  single,  earnest,  honest  soul  in  a  noble  cause."  He  could 
find  nothing  in  the  law  of  nations,  which  forbade  us  to  welcome 
an  exile  to  freedom ;  he  would  seek  no  precedent  for  that. 

But  while  he  recognized  the  greatness  of  the  guest,  the  charm 
of  his  eloquence  and  the  popularity  of  his  cause,  he  could  agree 
in  his  behalf,  to  no  belligerent  intervention  by  our  nation  in  the 
affairs  of  Europe.  He  insisted  that  such  a  thing  was  neither, 
upon  the  face  of  the  resolution  proposed  by  Seward,  nor  in  any 
way  to  be  implied,  from  anything  contained  in  its  terms.  He 
wished  to  be  distinctly  understood  as  favoring  no  such  interven^ 
tion.  While  he  inculcated  no  "  frigid  isolation  "  of  ourselves, — : 
while  he  hoped  that  we  would  never  close  our  ears  to  the 
cry  of  distress  and  that  we  would  never  cease  to  swell 


244  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

with  indignation  at  the  oppression  of  tyranny, — while  he 
would  offer  sympathy  to  all,  in  every  land,  who  struggled 
for  human  rights,  yet,  nevertheless,  against  every  pressure, 
against  all  popular  approaches,  against  all  solicitations,  against 
all  blandishments,  he  would  uphold,  with  steady  hand,  the 
peaceful  neutrality  of  the  Nation.  And  still,  with  these  con 
victions  he  could  not  join,  in  the  amendment,  proposing  a 
declaration  of  non-intervention,  in  the  resolution.  To  an  act 
of  courtesy  and  welcome,  it  attached  a  most  ungracious  con 
dition.  "  A  generous  hospitality  will  not  make  terms  or  condi 
tions  with  a  guest ! "  he  exclaimed,  "  and,"  he  added,  "  such 
hospitality,  I  trust,  Congress  will  tender  to  Louis  Kossuth." 

The  proposed  amendment  was  lost,  but  the  resolution  offered 
by  Seward,  welcoming  Kossuth  to  the  capital  and  the  country, 
in  the  name  of  the  people,  was  passed,  by  a  vote  of  thirty-three 
to  six,  in  the  Senate,  was  concurred  in  by  the  House,  and  ap 
proved  by  the  President. 

Kossuth  became  the  Nation's  guest  and  was  welcomed  by 
Daniel  Webster,  as  Secretary  of  State,  at  New  York,  in  a 
notable  speech.  He  visited  Washington  and  made  a  tour  of  the 
country,  speaking  in  the  principal  cities.  Sumner  met  him 
repeatedly  in  Washington.  The  charm  of  the  man  and  the 
success  of  his  eloquence  was  greater  than  ever  before.  He  was 
received  everywhere  with  unbounded  enthusiasm  and  aroused 
for  his  oppressed  and  dismembered  country,  the  deepest  sym 
pathy.  The  enthusiasm  for  his  cause,  was  so  sweeping  that  it 
threatened  for  a  time  to  become  a  national  issue,  whether  our 
Nation  should  interfere  or  not.  A  charm  still  gathers  about 
his  name;  and  his  visit  is  remembered,  as  one  of  the  brighest 
episodes  in  our  history,  and  one  of  the  most  impressive  in  the 
history  of  eloquence.  But  after  the  first  wave  of  excitement 
had  passed,  the  sober  second  thought  of  the  people  prevailed. 
The  country  lost  none  of  its  admiration  for  Kossuth  or  of  its 
sympathy  for  his  unfortunate  country,  but  it  was  seen  that  the 
armed  intervention  he  advocated  would  not  be  granted  by  our 
people  and  would  probably  be  unavailing  if  it  were.  , 

Sumner  had  struck  the  true  note,  in  his  speech,  the  one  that 
finally  prevailed,  welcome  without  stint,  to  a  noble  and  eloquent 
man,  admiration  for  his  work,  sympathy  for  struggling  human 
ity  everywhere, — but  no  belligerent  intervention,  by  our  nation, 
in  the  tangled  web  of  European  politics.  His  speech  was  a 
clean  cut  expression  of  national  duty  and  a  generous  tribute  to 
a  pure  patriot  and  a  good  man ;  but  it  in  no  way  committed  us 
to  a  cause  that  was  already  hopeless.  Just  at  the  beginning  of 
his  career,  it  was  well-timed  for  Sumner ;  and  it  was  well-timed 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  345 

for  the  country.  It  helped  him  in  the  estimation  of  his  fellow 
Senators,  to  whom  he  had  been  represented  as  an  agitator  and 
an  enthusiast,  a  man  of  one  idea.  It  showed  that  he  was  not 
as  represented,  that  on  one  subject  at  least,  he  was  careful,  con 
servative  and  sensible.  Thoughtful  men  generally  approved 
his  course.  It  satisfied  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  especially 
of  Boston,  always  of  a  strongly  conservative  tendency ;  and  it 
helped  to  correct  the  false  impression  of  Sumner  which  many 
of  the  newspapers  of  the  Whig  party  had  sought  to  convey 
during  the  contest  for  the  Senatorship. 

Rufus  Choate,  one  of  his  Whig  opponents,  in  acknowledging 
the  receipt  of  a  copy  of  the  speech,  in  a  characteristic  letter 
wrote :  "  I  thank  you  for  the  copy  of  your  beautiful  speech,  and 
for  the  making  of  it.  All  men  say  it  was  a  successful  one,  par- 
liamentarily  expressing  it;  and  I  am  sure  it  is  sound  and  safe, 
steering  skilfully  between  cold-shoulderism  and  inliospitality , 
on  the  one  side  and  the  splendid  folly  and  wickedness  of  co 
operation,  on  the  other.  Cover  the  Magyar  with  flowers,  lave 
him  with  perfumes,  serenade  him  with  eloquence,  and  let  him 
go  home  alone, — if  he  will  not  live  here.  Such  is  all  that  is 
permitted  to  wise  states,  aspiring  to  the  '  True  Grandeur/ 

"I  wish  to  Heaven  you  would  write  to  me  de  rebus  Con- 
gressus.  How  does  the  Senate  strike  you  ?  The  best  place  this 
day  on  earth  for  reasoned  and  thoughtful,  yet  stimulant  public 
speech.  Think  of  that.  Most  truly  yours, — in  the  Union. — " 

But  there  were  voices  of  dissent  from  Sumner's  speech, — 
not  many,  it  is  true,  and  not  loud.  It  is  a  curious  fact,  that 
some  of  them  came  from  his  closest  friends.  They  did  not 
agree  with  his  views  of  non-intervention.  Wilson  was  one  of 
them  and  Howe  was  another.  It  would  hardly  be  expected  that 
one  of  the  revolutionary  tendencies  of  Howe,  would  have  much 
fear  of  granting  the  assistance  sought  by  Kossuth.  When  a 
young  man  he  had  found  his  way  to  Greece  to  take  part  in  her 
revolution  and  again  he  went  to  Paris,  where  in  active  sym 
pathy  with  Lafayette,  he  took  part  in  the  convulsions  of  the 
city  against  Charles  the  Tenth.  The  consequences  which  might 
follow  such  a  step  as  intervention  by  our  country  in  the  affairs 
of  Hungary  would  have  little  terror  for  him.  His  sympathy 
for  human  suffering  and  for  the  oppressed  everywhere,  carried 
him  readily  over  questions  of  state  policy.  But  he  was  loyal  to 
Sumner.  He  wrote  him  chidingly,  yet  pleasantly,  saying  he 
would  not  have  believed,  that  one  who  had  gone  so  fearlessly 
into  the  Broad  Street  riot,  where  they  had  first  become  ac 
quainted,  would  now  hesitate  to  lend  his  vote  and  his  voice  to 
help  this  oppressed  people.  Wilson  agreed  with  him.  He  wel- 


246  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

corned  Kossuth  to  Boston  and  entered  heartily  into  his  mission. 
Other  Free-Soilers  agreed  with  Howe  and  Wilson.  But  the 
excitement  was  short-lived;  and  within  a  few  months  serious 
thought  of  intervention  disappeared. 

Sumner  continued  faithful  in  his  attendance  upon  the  ses 
sions  of  the  Senate,  watching  its  proceedings  closely  and  ex 
tending  his  acquaintance,  but  he  did  not  take  much  part  in  the 
public  work.  He  did  not  think  it  would  be  becoming  in  him 
to  do  so  and  such  part  as  he  did  take  he  wished  to  be  entirely 
distinct  from  the  slavery  question.  But  he  was  determined  that 
the  session  should  not  close  without  being  heard  upon  it.  He 
wanted  to  make  sure  of  his  ground,  to  learn  the  rules  of  pro 
ceeding  and  debate  and  when  he  did  speak  deliver  one  hard 
telling  blow. 

On  January  twenty-seventh,  1852,  he  spoke  upon  a  bill, 
under  consideration  in  the  Senate,  granting  public  land  to  the 
State  of  Iowa  in  aid  of  the  construction  of  railroads  within 
that  State.  He  had  made  some  study  of  the  subject,  which  led 
him  to  believe  that  such  aid  should  be  granted.  He  advanced 
the  argument  that  the  National  Government  owed  a  debt  to 
the  States  having  this  land  within  their  borders.  There  were 
many  million  acres  of  it,  and  all  exempt  from  taxation.  The 
burden  of  protecting  and  improving  it  was  a  tax  upon  the 
States,  where  it  happened  to  lie.  New  people  moved  into  the 
State,  crime  had  to  be  suppressed ;  the  school  enumeration  in 
creased  and  new  schoolhouses  had  to  be  built ;  canals  and  roads 
were  opened  and  the  taxable  property  had  to  pay  for  them. 
Such  things  all  gave  permanent  improvement  to  the  country 
and  enhanced  the  value  of  all  the  adjacent  land.  But  it  laid  a 
great  burden  upon  the  owners  of  private  property.  Sumner 
estimated  that  there  had  been,  up  to  January  first,  1849 ;  289,- 
961,954  acres  of  the  public  land  proclaimed  for  sale,  that  is, 
surveyed  and  placed  upon  the  market,  and  that  it  had  remained 
upon  the  market,  for  an  average  of  twenty-five  years,  before  it 
was  actually  sold.  All  this  time  it  was  receiving  protection 
and  development,  but  paying  nothing.  He  placed  the  actual 
cost  of  this  protection,  at  the  low  rate  of  one  cent  per  acre  each 
year,  while  it  probably  should  have  been  two  or  three  cents  a 
year.  But  at  this  low  rate  of  one  cent,  it  amounted  in  twenty- 
five  years  to  $72,490,475,  an  immense  sum,  clearly  illustrating 
the  amount  the  National  Government  was  actually  debtor  to 
the  States  which  embraced  the  land.  He  argued  that  tardy 
justice  required,  when  opportunity  presented,  as  it  did  then, 
that  the  Nation  make  reasonable  grants  of  the  land,  in  aid 
of  these  improvements.  "  Coming  from  different  States  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  247 

opposite  sections  we  are  all/'  he  said,  "  Senators  of  the  Union, 
and  our  constant  duty  is  without  fear  or  favor  to  introduce  into 
the  national  legislature  the  principle  of  justice." 

He  could  see  no  more  appropriate  object  of  such  a  grant 
than  the  building  of  good  roads.  "It  would  be  difficult  to 
exaggerate  the  influence  of  roads  as  means  of  civilization,"  he 
said.  te  Where  roads  are  not  civilization  cannot  be ;  and  civil 
ization  advances  as  roads  are  extended.  By  roads,  religion  and 
knowledge  are  diffused ;  intercourse  of  all  kinds  is  promoted, — 
producer,  manufacturer  and  consumer  are  all  brought  nearer 
together, — commerce  is  quickened, — markets  are  created, — 
property,  wherever  touched  by  these  lines,  as  by  a  magic  rod, 
is  changed  into  new  values, — and  the  great  current  of  travel, 
like  that  stream  of  classic  fable  or  one  of  the  great  rivers  in 
our  own  California,  hurries  in  a  channel  of  golden  sand.  The 
roads  together  with  the  laws  of  ancient  Rome,  are  now  better 
remembered  than  her  victories.  The  Flaminian  and  Appian 
ways,  once  trod  by  such  great  destinies,  still  remain  as  benefi 
cent  representatives  of  ancient  grandeur.  Under  God  the 
roads  and  the  schoolmaster  are  two  chief  agents  of  human  im 
provement.  The  education  begun  by  the  schoolmaster  is  ex 
panded,  liberalized  and  completed  by  intercourse  with  the 
world ;  and  this  intercourse  finds  new  opportunities  and  in 
ducements  in  every  road  that  is  built." 

The  argument  of  Sumner  attracted  attention.  It  was  a  new 
view  of  the  subject;  and  the  subject  was  one  of  present  and 
growing  importance  to  the  country.  Government  aid  to  roads 
and  railroads  had  always  met  with  opposition.  The  building 
of  the  National  Road,  from  Baltimore  westward,  over  the 
mountains,  in  the  face  of  steady  and  persistent  opposition  had 
been  one  of  the  triumphs  of  the  statesmanship  of  Henry  Clay, 
for  which  the  people  of  Wheeling,  through  whose  city  it  passed 
had  erected  to  him  a  monument.  Railroads  were  only  begin 
ning  to  be  built ;  our  country  was  large  and  its  wants  growing. 
To  build  them  would  require  the  expenditure  of  millions. 
Should  the  National  Government  establish  the  precedent  of 
furnishing  this  aid  ?  True  it  was  not  money,  but  public  lands 
they  now  asked,  yet  the  public  lands  had  a  value  and  Sumner 
was  in  favor  of  giving  such  aid. 

But  the  question  of  the  disposition  of  the  public  lands  was  as 
interesting  as  that  of  internal  improvements.  The  Senators 
from  many  of  the  other  states,  having  none  of  this  land,  within 
their  boundaries,  thought  it  should  be  preserved  to  be  sold.  The 
debate  continued  from  day  to  day  until  the  seventeenth  day  of 
February  when  Sumner's  argument  was  assailed  by  Hunter  of 


248  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Virginia,  who  with  Underwood  of  Kentucky  was  particularly 
radical  in  opposition  to  the  bill.  When  Hunter  ceased  speak 
ing,  Sumner  arose  to  restate  his  argument  and  call  attention  to 
the  fact  that  if  wrong  it  should  be  answered,  that  Hunter  had 
only  claimed  he  had  overstated  the  figures  but  nowhere  denied 
that  they  were  figures  even  if  overstated  and  had  not  even 
attempted  to  answer  them.  The  debate  still  continuing,  an 
effort  was  made  to  amend  the  bill,  by  providing  that  portions 
of  the  public  land  should  be  distributed  to  each  of  the  thirteen 
original  states  and  to  Maine,  Vermont,  Tennessee  and  Kentucky 
in  the  proportion  of  one  acre  to  each  inhabitant,  according  to 
the  last  census  to  be  used  for  purposes  of  education  and  in 
ternal  improvements.  Sumner  opposed  this  amendment. 

The  Senators  from  the  West  and  Southwest  appreciated  the 
service  Sumner  had  done  them  in  this  debate  and  felt  under  ob 
ligation  to  him.  It  was  valuable  aid  from  an  unexpected  source. 
His  argument  attracted  a  good  deal  of  attention,  in  the  Senate, 
and  over  the  country, — especially  in  the  West  where  most  of  the 
lands  lay.  In  Massachusetts  it  was  made  the  occasion  of 
criticism  of  Sumner  by  the  Whigs  and  of  a  resolution  on  the 
subject,  in  the  Legislature.  The  Whig  papers  in  Boston  took 
it  up  against  him  and  criticised  his  course.  But  the  Free- 
Soilers  were  satisfied  with  it.  They  were  largely  composed  of 
young  men  and  controlled  by  conscience  more  than  by  questions 
of  finance.  They  had  sent  Sumner  to  the  Senate  and  were  loyal 
to  him.  At  this  time  he  was  in  consultation  or  correspondence 
with  many  of  them  and  appreciated  their  advice  and  confidence. 

One  of  their  leaders  was  Robert  Eantoul,  Jr.,  who  was  elected 
to  Congress,  the  previous  fall,  by  the  same  coalition  of  Free- 
Soilers  and  Democrats  as  had  placed  Sumner  in  the  Senate.  He 
had  also  been  chosen,  by  the  same  coalition,  to  fill  the  unexpired 
term  of  Webster  in  the  Senate,  an  interval  of  a  few  weeks 
expiring  next  March  4,  and  had  he  lived,  he  would  probably 
have  become  Sumner's  colleague,  after  the  next  election. 
He  died  at  Washington,  while  serving  his  first  term  in  the  ' 
House.  He  belonged  to  one  of  the  substantial  families  of 
Beverly,  was  an  able  lawyer,  had  been  carefully  educated  to 
his  profession  and  of  such  tastes  as  led  him  to  continue  his 
literary  studies  in  connection  with  the  law.  He  had  at  the 
time  of  his  death,  in  contemplation,  the  preparation  of  a  his 
tory  of  France.  His  father  before  him  had  filled  important 
positions,  had  been  a  Member  of  the  Legislature,  Collector  of 
Revenue  at  Boston,  and  United  States  District  Attorney  for 
Massachusetts,  so  that,  by  training  and  experience,  the  son  had 
been  fitted  for  a  public  career.  But  it  was  ended  all  too  soon,, 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  249 

at  the  early  age  of  forty-six,  suddenly,  after  a  brief  illness, — so 
brief  that  Sumner  did  not  know  of  his  sickness,  till  he  heard 
he  was  dying.  His  interest  in  the  anti-slavery  cause,  his  posi 
tion  in  Congress,  his  ability  to  maintain  himself,  in  public 
speech,  made  him  one  whose  death  at  the  time,  was  a  loss. 

Two  days  after  his  death  in  a  eulogy  in  the  Senate,  Sumner 
said  of  him :  "  There  was  no  topic  within  the  wide  range  of 
national  concern,  which  did  not  occupy  his  th'oughts.  The 
resources  and  needs  of  the  West  were  all  known  to  him  and 
Western  interests  were  like  his  own.  As  the  pioneer,  resting 
from  his  daily  labors  learns  the  death  of  Eantoul,  he  will  feel 
a  personal  grief.  The  fishermen  on  the  Eastern  coast,  many  of 
whom  are  dwellers  in  his  District  will  sympathize  with  the 
pioneer.  These  hardy  children  of  the  sea,  returning  in  their 
small  craft  from  late  adventures,  and  hearing  the  sad  tidings, 
will  feel  that  they  too  have  lost  a  friend.  And  well  they  may. 
During  his  last  fitful  hours  of  life,  while  reason  still  struggled 
against  disease,  he  was  anxious  for  their  welfare.  The  speech 
which  he  had  hoped  soon  to  make  in  their  behalf,  was  then 
chasing  through  his  mind.  Finally  in  broken  utterances,  he 
gave  to  them  his  latest  thoughts.  The  death  of  such  a  man,  so 
sudden  in  mid  career  is  well  calculated  to  arrest  attention 
and  to  furnish  admonition." 

After  enumerating  the  good  causes, — public  improvements, 
particularly  railroads,  common  schools,  temperance,  etc.,  for 
which  he  had  struggled,  Sumner  said  :  "  There  is  another 
cause  that  commanded  his  early  sympathies  and  some  of  his 
latest  endeavors,  to  which  had  life  been  spared,  he  would  have 
given  the  splendid  maturity  of  his  powers.  Posterity  cannot 
forget  this ;  but  I  am  forbidden  by  the  occasion  to  name  it  here. 
Sir,  in  the  long  line  of  portraits  on  the  walls  of  the  Ducal 
Palace  at  Venice,  commemorating  its  Doges,  a  single  panel 
where  a  portrait  should  have  been  is  shrouded  by  a  dark  cur 
tain.  But  this  darkened  blank,  in  that  place,  attracts  the  be 
holder  more  than  any  picture.  Let  such  a  curtain  fall  to-day 
upon  this  theme/' 

The  reference  was  to  slavery, — the  first  Sumner  made  to  it 
in  the  Senate.  But  even  this  slight  allusion  in  the  sensitive 
condition  of  the  Senate,  caused  such  irritation,  that  Sumner's 
colleague,  John  Davis,  gave  it  as  his  reason  for  not  speaking  on 
the  resolutions  and  allowing  the  vote  upon  them  to  be  taken  at 
once. 

But  the  slavery  question  could  not  be  kept  out  of  the  Con^ 
gressional  Record.  Frown  on  it,  resolve  against  it,  compromise 
it  as  they  might,  still  it  seemed  to  be  the  one  subject  that  always 


250  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

appeared.  The  mention  of  it  was  almost  sure  to  provoke  a 
scene.  Members  were  tired  of  it.  They  felt  that  little  good 
could  come  of  farther  discussion  of  it.  They  ruled  it  out  of 
order,  but  the  people  sent  new  men,  who  would  bring  it  to  the 
attention  of  Congress  again  and  insist  upon  discussing  it. 

During  his  first  winter  in  Washington,  Sumner  was  asked 
to  present  to  the  Senate  a  memorial  asking  for  the  release  of 
Drayton  and  Sayres,  master  and  mate  of  the  schooner  Pearl, 
who  had  been  convicted  and  imprisoned  for  the  crime  of  trans 
porting  slaves.  This  was  the  first  work  in  the  anti-slavery 
cause  that  Sumner  was  asked  to  do  in  Washington.  It  is  an 
interesting  episode  in  anti-slavery  history  and  on  this  account, 
aside  from  Sumner's  connection  with  it,  is  worth  preserving. 
On  the  morning  of  the  sixteenth  of  April,  1848,  the  people  of 
Washington  were  surprised,  with  the  intelligence  that  seventy- 
six  slaves  had  escaped  on  board  the  Pearl,  a  vessel,  that  had  been 
quietly  lying  in  the  river  and  sailing  down  the  Potomac,  were 
then  hurrying  off  to  Freedom.  The  news  and  the  thought  that 
their  own  property  might  thus  easily  flee  away,  caused  much 
excitement  among  the  slave-holders  of  the  city.  Other  vessels 
were  immediately  dispatched  in  pursuit,  the  Pearl  was  over 
hauled  and  the  slaves  with  Drayton  and  Sayres  were  brought 
back  to  the  city.  Upon  landing,  the  offending  master  and 
mate  were  met  on  the  wharf  by  a  mob  that  threatened  to 
lynch  them.  The  police  however  succeeded  in  getting  them  to 
the  jail,  when  the  mob  surrounded  the  building  and  learning 
that  Joshua  R.  Giddings  was  there  in  consultation  with  the 
prisoners,  as  their  attorney,  they  demanded  that  he  be  at  once 
expelled  or  they  would  cause  bloodshed.  And  the  jailer  obliged 
him  to  retire. 

The  case  of  the  offending  master  and  mate  was  promptly 
brought  before  a  grand-jury  and  one  hundred  and  fifteen  in 
dictments  were  found  against  them.  Horace  Mann,  then  a  Rep 
resentative  in  Congress  from  Massachusetts,  at  Sumner's  re 
quest,  defended  them,  on  their  trial,  Sumner  assisting  him  with 
authorities.  They  were,  however,  convicted  and  were  sentenced 
to  pay  fines  amounting  to  more  than  twenty  thousand  dollars 
and  were  remanded  to  jail  till  the  fines  and  costs  were  paid. 
They  had  already  lain  in  jail  more  than  four  years.  Some  good 
people  in  Boston,  among  them  Wendell  Phillips,  united  in  a 
petition  to  Congress  asking  for  their  release  and  sent  it  to 
Sumner  for  presentation  in  the  Senate.  Sumner,  feeling  that 
such  a  petition  presented  to  a  body  of  such  sentiments  would 
only  raise  a  new  storm  against  Drayton  and  Sayres,  took  the 
liberty  to  withhold  it  and  applied  to  President  Fillmore,  in 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  251 

their  behalf,  for  a  pardon.  The  President  questioned  his  power 
to  grant  a  pardon  in  such  a  case,  part  of  the  fines  being  payable 
to  the  owners  of  the  slaves  abducted ;  and  so  the  matter  rested 
for  some  months.  Upon  Sumner  pressing  the  matter  farther, 
the  President  asked  him  to  furnish  some  authorities  in 
support  of  his  power  to  grant  a  pardon  in  such  cases.  Sumner 
thereupon  prepared  a  brief  upon  this  question,  which  the  Presi 
dent  submitted  to  the  Attorney-General.  He  sustained  the  view 
of  Sumner  as  to  the  power  of  the  President  to  grant  the  pardon, 
but  expressly  refrained  from  expressing  any  opinion  as  to  the 
propriety  of  granting  it  in  these  cases. 

Soon  after,  the  Whig  Convention  nominating  General  Scott 
for  President,  thus  defeating  Fillmore,  the  pardons  were 
granted.  The  President  informed  Sumner,  by  a  note  that  he 
had  signed  them,  when  Sumner  fearing  that  the  prisoners 
would  be  arrested  on  other  charges,  went  to  the  jail,  in  a  car 
riage  and  placing  them  in  charge  of  a  friend,  they  were  driven 
under  the  darkness  of  night  to  Baltimore,  where  they  arrived 
in  time  to  take  the  early  train  for  the  North  and  were  soon  in 
a  Free  State  and  out  of  danger. 

By  some  persons  Sumner  was  criticised  for  not  following  the 
request  of  the  petitioners  and  presenting  their  prayer  to  Con 
gress.  Such  a  course  they  thought  would  have  given  publicity 
to  the  application  and  would  have  aroused  indignation  at  the 
treatment  of  the  prisoners,  and  would  also  have  provoked  a 
discussion  of  the  slavery  question  in  Congress.  But  whatever 
of  benefit  it  might  have  brought  in  this  way,  would  the  chance 
of  the  good  have  justified  the  additional  suffering  it  would 
have  entailed  on  Drayton  and  Sayres?  Sumner  thought  it 
would  not  and  the  prisoners,  when  he  visited  the  jail  for  the 
purpose  of  consulting  them,  agreed  with  him.  They  felt  they 
had  suffered  enough  already  for  the  cause,  without  additional 
martyrdom  being  placed  upon  them.  Wendell  Phillips  frankly 
admitted  the  wisdom  of  Sumner's  course. 

It  was  not  the  intention  of  either  the  Whigs  or  Democrats  to 
have  any  discussion  of  the  slavery  question  during  this  ses 
sion  of  Congress.  The  Compromise  measures,  which  were  to 
settle  everything,  and  on  which  Webster  had  made  his  fatal 
seventh  of  March  speech,  had  been  passed  only  the  previous  ses 
sion,  after  a  long  and  anxious  debate.  The  recollection  of  it 
was  too  fresh  for  them  to  permit  this  Compromise  to  be  at 
tacked  thus  early.  Both  parties  in  their  National  Platforms, 
during  the  summer  of  1852,  while  Congress  was  still  in  ses 
sion,  had  declared  the  question  settled  and  were  pledged  against 
any  attempt  to  reopen  it.  They  both  hoped  to  be  rid  of  it 


252  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

during  the  coming  campaign.  They  were  determined  that 
whoever  attempted  to  open  it,  should  be  put  down  if  possible. 
This  did  not  bode  well  for  Sumner,  who  had  been  sent  to  the 
Senate  to  do  this  very  thing  and  because  of  his  especial  capacity 
for  it.  But  he  was  not  a  party  to  the  Compromise,  and  the 
pledges  of  others  to  sustain  it,  did  not  bind  him.  He  was  there 
fore  determined  to  discuss  it. 

On  the  26th  day  of  May,  he  offered  in  the  Senate,  the  pe 
tition  of  some  residents  of  Massachusetts,  of  the  Society  of 
Friends  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law.  This  law 
was  enacted  as  a  part  of  the  Compromise.  He  had  read  only  a 
part  of  it,  the  prayer  of  the  petition,  setting  out  in  respectful 
terms,  that  they  asked  the  repeal  of  the  law,  because  of  its  in 
justice  to  a  long  oppressed  race  and  especially  because  it  placed 
them  in  jeopardy  of  the  penalties  of  a  law,  which  they  could  not 
conscientiously  obey.  He  was  prefacing  his  motion  for  a  refer 
ence  of  the  petition  to  the  proper  committee  with  the  remark : 
''  This  memorial  is  commended  by  the  character  of  the  religious 
association  from  which  it  proceeds, — men  who  mingle  rarely  in 
public  affairs,  but  with  austere  virtue  seek  to  carry  the  Chris 
tian  rule  into  life ; "  when  he  was  abruptly  stopped  by  the 
Presiding  officer,  Mr.  King,  of  Alabama,  who  called  him  to 
order,  telling  him  that  he  had  no  right  to  say  anything  more 
than  state  the  contents  of  the  memorial  and  move  its  reference, 
that  more  than  this  was  out  of  order.  Yet  Sumner  had  ob 
served  that  it  was  the  constant  practice,  upon  any  other  sub 
ject  to  do  just  as  he  was  doing.  Upon  being  assured  that  it 
was  not  his  purpose  to  make  a  speech  on  the  subject  of  slavery, 
the  Senate  allowed  him  to  proceed.  He  then  completed  his 
statement,  but  gave  notice  that  at  some  appropriate  time  he 
proposed  to  address  the  Senate  upon  this  question. 

He  moved  to  refer  the  petition  to  the  Committee  on  the  Judi 
ciary.  A  discussion  of  the  motion  arose.  Finally  on  motion 
of  Badger  of  North  Carolina,  the  memorial  was  laid  on  the 
table. 

Without  saying  much  about  it,  except  to  his  most  intimate 
friends,  Sumner  felt  discouraged  by  the  prospect.  Senators 
knew  he  wished  to  speak  on  the  subject,  but  they  were  resolved, 
and  openly  made  their  boasts,  that  he  should  not  be  allowed 
to  do  so.  He  felt  that  he  could  not  expect  to  change  their 
convictions  by  what  he  would  say,  but  he  insisted  that  he  should 
be  allowed  the  right  of  free  discussion,  in  the  place  to  which 
he  had  been  elected.  Almost  pleadingly  he  reminded  them, 
that  thus  far  during  the  session,  he  had  forborne  to  obtrude 
his  views  upon  them,  that  it  was  only  justice  he  asked,  that 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  253 

both  sides  should  be  heard  and  he  hoped  they  would  hear  him 
patiently,  while  he  candidly  and  courteously  presented  the 
views  of  another  portion  of  the  country  differing  from  theirs. 

On  the  27th  day  of  July,  Sumner  made  another  attempt  to 
be  heard.  He  offered  a  resolution  in  the  Senate  instructing  the 
Judiciary  Committee  to  consider  the  expediency  of  reporting 
a  bill  repealing  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  gave  notice  that  he 
would  ask  to  be  heard  on  the  next  day.  Accordingly  the  next 
day,  July  28th,  he  called  up  the  Kesolution  and  asked  the  Senate 
for  leave  to  speak  upon  it. 

"  In  allowing  me  this  privilege,"  he  said,  "  this  right,  I 
may  say,  you  do  not  commit  yourselves  in  any  way  to  the  prin 
ciple  of  the  resolution ;  you  merely  follow  the  ordinary  usage 
of  the  Senate,  and  yield  to  a  brother  Senator  the  opportunity 
which  he  craves,  in  the  practical  discharge  of  his  duty,  to  ex 
press  convictions  dear  to  his  heart,  and  dear  to  large  numbers 
of  his  constituents.  For  the  sake  of  these  constituents,  for 
my  own  sake,  I  now  desire  to  be  heard.  Make  such  disposition 
of  my  resolutions  afterwards,  as  to  you  shall  seem  best;  visit 
upon  me  any  degree  of  criticism,  censure  or  displeasure;  but 
do  not  refuse  me  a  hearing.  e  Strike,  but  hear/  '- 

A  debate  ensued,  all  the  speakers  except  one,  being  opposed 
to  taking  up  the  resolution.  They  assigned  the  want  of  time 
and  danger  to  the  Union  as  the  reasons.  When  the  vote  was 
taken,  there  were  only  ten  in  its  favor ;  while  thirty- two  voted 
against  it.  Sumner  was  deliberately  denied  the  privilege  of 
speaking.  He  now  saw  that  if  he  spoke  at  all,  it  would  have  to 
be  as  a  matter  of  right,  at  a  time  when  the  Senate  under  its 
rules  could  not  stop  him.  He  must  therefore  watch  for  such  a 
time  and  find  it,  or  go  back  to  his  constituents,  at  the  close  of 
the  session,  unheard  and,  perhaps,  discredited. 

His  constituents  did  not  understand  his  silence.  How  was 
it  possible  for  plain  people, — farmers  at  work  in  the  fields,  or 
the  smith  at  his  forge,  or  the  fisherman  toiling  at  his  oar,  to 
know  the  rules  of  the  Senate  ?  Who  would  explain  his  silence 
to  them  ?  And  yet  they  were  the  people  around  whose  hearths, 
the  newspapers  were  daily  read  in  hope  of  learning  of  some  of 
the  powerful  strokes  for  Freedom,  they  had  been  accustomed 
to  hear  from  him  on  the  platform  and  at  the  hustings.  Would 
they  think,  that  he,  who  had  talked  to  them  of  the  need  of  more 
backbone  and  whom  they  had  supported  because  he  was  thought 
to  have  this  essential  qualification,  had  been  seduced  from  the 
path  of  duty.  And  yet  these  were  people  whose  good  opinion 
Sumner  valued.  Such  thoughts  troubled  him. 

In  certain  quarters  in  Massachusetts,  there  was  already  dis- 


254  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

satisfaction  with  his  silence.  The  Free-Soilers,  the  party  which 
had  really  placed  him  in  the  Senate,  were  men  usually  of  high 
moral  purposes,  but  intent  on  the  one  object  before  them  and 
so  absorbed  in  it,  that  they  were  apt  to  forget  all  other  con 
siderations.  They  were  often  impracticable.  They  were  ex 
acting  in  their  claims  upon  public  officials  and  inclined  to  be 
pessimistic  and  to  believe  that  men  in  office  were  not  faithful 
or  honest.  When  their  confidence  in  a  man  was  once  shaken 
they  were  unreasonable  in  their  opinion  of  him  and  usually 
loud  in  expressing  it.  This  was  a  hard  party  to  serve.  As  their 
servant,  Sumner  felt  during  his  first  winter  in  Washington  that 
his  position  was  a  hard  one.  He  feared  they  were  requiring 
more  of  him  than  human  skill  could  accomplish. 

Sumner's  Free-Soil  constituents  were  frequently  taunted 
on  the  subject  of  his  silence,  by  the  Whigs  on  one  side  and  by 
the  non-voting  Abolitionists,  on  the  other.  Of  course  the  Whigs 
after  fighting  his  election,  wished  him  to  fail.  This  would  con 
firm  their  estimate  of  him,  when  they  said  before  his  election 
that  he  was  unfit  for  the  place.  They  had  abundant  means  of 
calling  attention  to  his  silence  and  giving  publicity  to  his  course, 
for  they  controlled  the  leading  newspapers  of  the  State.  These 
papers  had  generally  pursued  a  disparaging  course  towards  him. 
For  example,  in  the  Iowa  land  debate,  they  gave  prominence, 
in  their  accounts  of  it,  to  the  views  of  his  adversaries  and  to 
what  was  said  in  criticism  of  Surnner,  while  they  gave  no  space 
to  his  remarks  or  to  his  arguments.  In  a  note  to  an  edition  of 
his  speeches  which  he  was  then  publishing,  Winthrop  called 
disparaging  attention  to  Sumner's  silence.  Another  Whig 
made  a  reference  to  it,  in  a  speech  in  the  State  Senate,  so 
pointed  and  offensive  that  \Vilson  left  the  chair  to  reply  to  it. 
Such  thrusts  were  common  in  conversation. 

The  non-voting  Abolitionists  were  even  worse  than  the 
Whigs.  While  it  must  be  conceded  they  meant  well  to  the  anti- 
slavery  cause,  they  had  such  a  disagreeable  way  of  showing  it, 
that  it  may  fairly  be  questioned  whether  they  did  not  do  the 
cause  more  harm  than  good.  They  stubbornly  refused  to  help 
it  by  their  votes,  yet  after  their  more  sensible  anti-slavery 
friends,  by  working  and  managing  and  voting  had  secured  a 
victory,  they  presumptuously  rushed  in  to  take  charge  of  who 
ever  was  thus  elected  assuming  to  direct  him  in  everything  and 
if  he  did  not  at  once  bow  to  their  nod,  they  proceeded  to  dis 
card  him  and  proclaim  him  untrue.  Just  at  this  time  they  were 
busy  denouncing  Sumner. 

William  Lloyd  Garrison,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Norfolk  County 
Anti-Slavery  Society,  held  at  Dedham,  offered  a  resolution, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  255 

criticising  Simmer  for  his  silence  for  four  months.  But  the 
resolution  was  successfully  opposed  by  others,  who  knew  the 
reasons  for  his  silence,  from  correspondence  and  who  approved 
his  course.  Among  its  opposers  was  Wendell  Phillips.  He 
spoke  against  the  resolution  and  said  that  the  man  who  delivered 
that  City  Oration  and  who  not  being  aware  of  the  sacrifice  he 
was  making  for  his  principles,  yet  had  stuck  to  them  as  he  did 
after  finding  it  out,  and  who  had  afterward  advanced  to  the 
prison  discipline  and  anti-slavery  struggles  and  maintained 
himself  as  he  had  done,  had  earned  the  right  to  be  trusted, 
farther  than  men  could  see  his  steps  or  know  his  reasons  and 
that  he  proposed  to  trust  him  to  the  end  of  the  session. 

Richard  H.  Dana,  Jr.,  best  characterized  the  situation,  how 
ever,  when  he  wrote  Sumner :  "  There  are  some  men  who  think 
that  nothing  is  doing,  unless  there  is  a  gun  firing  or  a  bell 
ringing.  They  are  superficial  persons  in  whom  is  no  depth  of 
root;  they  are  easily  offended.  The  work  we  have  to  do  is  a 
long  one ;  there  is  no  pending  question.  Patience  and  judgment 
and  preparation  are  as  necessary  as  zeal  and  more  rare." 

The  effect,  however,  of  all  this  carping  criticism  of  the  Whigs 
and  the  non-voting  Abolitionists  was  to  the  disadvantage  of 
Sumner,  who  had  not  yet  an  established  reputation  as  a  states 
man  to  give  confidence  to  his  supporters.  It  made  his  position 
difficult,  and  it  stirred  up  opposition  to  him  in  his  own  party. 
But  in  the  main,  while  many  of  the  party  did  not  understand 
his  course,  they  continued  loyal  to  him.  The  leaders,  however, 
realized  that  they  could  not  be  depended  on  to  continue  this 
support  indefinitely.  Voters  had  been  attracted  from  the  old 
parties,  by  the  promises  held  out  by  the  new  and  these  promises 
must  be  fulfilled.  They  advised  him  that  to  let  the  session 
close,  without  speaking  would  destroy  confidence  in  him  and 
weaken  his  position  with  the  people  and  would  injure  the 
party,  for  whose  success  they  were  all  anxious. 

What  Sumner  feared  was  that  he  might  not  be  able  to  speak. 
He  realized  now  that  the  Senate  would  not  consent  to  hear  him. 
He  realized  also  that  he  could  not  be  heard  as  of  right  and 
without  the  consent  of  the  Senate  except  on  the  appropriation 
bill  when  it  came  up  for  consideration.  Some  of  the  Senators, 
like  Soule,  had  expressed  to  him  privately,  a  desire  to  hear  his 
views,  but  the  discipline  of  the  party  was  so  great  upon  this 
question,  that  upon  July  27  and  28,  when  he  had  asked  the 
privilege  of  speaking,  these  very  Senators  had  voted  with  the 
majority  against  hearing  him.  Upon  any  other  question  this 
courtesy  would  not  have  been  denied  him.  Some  of  them  urged 
him  to  ask  leave  to  print  his  speech,  in  the  Record  without 


256  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

delivering  it;  others  had  begged  that  he  would  not  press  the 
Senate  to  a  vote  on  slavery,  at  this  session  and  thus  embarrass 
some  supporters  of  General  Scott,  like  Seward,  by  compelling 
them  to  record  their  position.  But  Suirmer's  answer  was  that 
he  would  speak  and,  God  willing,  he  would  press  the  question 
to  a  vote,  even  if  he  were  left  alone.  This  being  known,  he 
feared  the  consideration  of  the  appropriation  bill  would  be 
postponed  till  the  last  day  of  the  session  to  prevent  him  being 
heard,  and  thus  compel  him  to  either  not  speak  at  all  or  if  he 
did,  to  not  be  heard  fully.  He  might  prevent  the  passage  of  the 
bill  and  thereby  cause  an  extra  session.  Sumner,  however,  was 
a  man  not  easily  turned  from  his  purpose.  He  knew  he  had  a 
right  to  be  heard,  and  he  determined  he  would  be  heard,  even 
at  the  risk  of  an  extra  session. 

But  as  he  did  not  wish  to  take  before  the  country  the  respon 
sibility  for  an  extra  session,  he  kept  his  purpose  of  speaking  on 
the  appropriation  bill  a  secret,  except  from  a  few  close  friends, 
upon  whom  he  laid  the  injunction  of  secrecy.  To  prevent  its 
being  suspected,  he  cleared  away  the  evidence  of  preparation, 
removed  the  books  and  papers  from  his  desk  and  gave  attention 
to  the  routine  work  of  the  Senate.  He,  however,  pressed  his 
preparation  vigorously,  at  all  times  when  the  Senate  was  not  in 
session,  knowing  that  no  work  now  would  be  lost,  that  the  time 
was  approaching  when  he  must  be  heard. 

At  last  that  time  came.  The  appropriation  bill  was  reported 
to  the  Senate,  on  the  nineteenth  day  of  August,  but  it  was  not 
until  August  twenty-sixth,  within  three  days  of  the  close  of 
the  session,  that  any  item  of  the  bill  was  reached  for  considera 
tion,  to  which  his  speech  would  be  relevant.  His  purpose  was, 
when  the  clause  was  reached,  providing  for  the  expense  of  the 
United  States  Courts  in  executing  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  to 
move  to  strike  out  every  appropriation  for  the  execution  of  it 
and  ask  that  the  law  itself  be  repealed.  On  the  twenty-sixth 
day  of  August,  Hunter,  of  Virginia,  on  recommendation  of  the 
Committee,  moved  to  amend  the  bill,  as  follows : 

"  That  where  the  ministerial  officers  of  the  United  States 
have  or  shall  incur  extraordinary  expenses  in  executing  the 
laws  thereof,  the  payment  of  which  is  not  specifically  provided 
for,  the  President  of  the  United  States  is  authorized  to  allow 
the  payment  thereof  under  the  special  taxation  of  the  District 
or  Circuit  Court  of  the  District  in  which  the  said  services  have 
been  or  shall  be  rendered,  to  be  paid  from  the  appropriation  for 
defraying  the  expenses  of  the  Judiciary/5 

This  was  Sumner's  opportunity  and  he  promptly  seized  it  and 
offered  the  following  amendment  to  the  one  offered  by  Hunter : 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  257 

"  Provided  that  no  such  allowance  shall  be  authorized  for 
any  expenses  incurred  in  executing  the  Act  of  September  18, 
1850,  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  service  or  labor,  which 
said  Act  is  hereby  repealed." 

On  this  he  took  the  floor  and  spoke.  In  commencing  he  did 
not  conceal  the  exultation  he  felt,  in  having  at  last  secured  this 
opportunity  to  discuss  slavery  and  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law. 

"  Here  is  a  provision  for  extraordinary  expenses,"  he  saidr 
"  incurred  in  executing  the  laws  of  the  United  States.  Extra 
ordinary  expenses !  Sir,  beneath  these  specious  words  lurks  the 
very  subject  on  which  by  a  solemn  vote  of  this  body,  I  was 
refused  a  hearing.  Here  it  is  no  longer  open  to  the  charge  of 
being  an  '  abstraction/  but  actually  presented  for  practical 
legislation;  not  introduced  by  me,  but  by  the  Senator  from 
Virginia,  on  the  recommendation  of  an  important  committee 
of  the  Senate ;  not  brought  forward  weeks  ago,  when  there  was 
ample  time  for  discussion,  but  only  at  this  moment,  without 
any  reference  to  the  late  period  of  the  session.  The  amendment 
which  I  offer  proposes  to  remove  one  chief  occasion  of  these 
extraordinary  expenses.  Beyond  all  controversy  or  cavil  it  is 
strictly  in  order.  And  now,  at  last,  among  these  final  crowded 
days  of  our  duties  here,  but  at  this  earliest  opportunity,  I  am  to 
be  heard, — not  as  a  favor,  but  as  a  right.  The  graceful  usages 
of  this  body  may  be  abandoned  but  the  established  privileges 
of  debate  cannot  be  abridged.  Parliamentary  courtesy  may  be 
forgotten,  but  parliamentary  law  must  prevail.  The  subject 
is  broadly  before  the  Senate.  By  the  blessing  of  God  it  shall 
be  discussed/7 

He  referred  to  the  responsibility  he  assumed  in  attacking  an 
institution  engrafted  as  slavery  had  been  upon  the  constitution 
and  laws  of  the  country.  In  the  existing  distemper  of  the 
public  mind  and  at  the  present  juncture  no  man,  he  said,  could 
enter  upon  the  service  which  he  now  undertook,  without  per 
sonal  responsibility  such  as  could  be  sustained  only  by  the  sense 
of  duty  which,  under  God,  is  always  one's  best  support.  But  he 
was  willing  to  be  held  responsible  for  this  act  before  the  Senate 
and  the  country  and  for  every  word  which  he  was  about  to  utter. 
He  was  painfully  convinced  of  the  unutterable  wrong  and  woe 
of  slavery  and  he  believed  that  according  to  the  true  spirit  of 
the  Constitution  it  could  find  no  place  under  our  National 
Government. 

"  I  have  never  been  a  politician,"  he  said.  "  The  slave  of 
principle  I  call  no  party  master.  By  sentiment,  education  and 
conviction  a  friend  of  human  rights  in  their  utmost  expansion, 
I  have  ever  most  sincerely  embraced  the  Democratic  Idea, — not, 


258  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

indeed,  as  represented  or  professed  by  any  party  but  accord 
ing  to  its  real  significance  as  transfigured  in  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  and  in  the  injunctions  of  Christianity.  In 
this  idea  I  see  no  narrow  advantage  merely  for  individuals  or 
classes,  but  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  and  the  greatest 
happiness  of  all  secured  by  equal  laws.  I  shall  hold  fast  always 
to  this  idea  and  to  any  political  party  which  truly  embraces  it." 

He  reminded  them  that  he  would  not  forget  the  amenities 
which  belong  to  debate  and  which  especially  became  the  Sen 
ate.  It  was  the  institution  of  slavery  which  he  assailed,  not 
its  apologists.  It  was  this  wrong  which  he  condemned  without 
fear  and  without  favor  but  as  without  impeachment  of  any 
person. 

Coming  to  the  question  of  slavery  he  said  that  at  the  thresh 
old  he  encountered  the  objection  that  there  had  been  a  final 
settlement  in  principle  and  substance  of  this  question  and  that 
all  discussion  of  it  was  closed,  that  both  the  old  political  parties 
in  their  conventions  had  recently  united  in  this  declaration ;  and 
yet  this  was  the  very  subject  which  was  palpitating  in  every 
heart  and  burning  on  every  tongue.  He  insisted  that  such 
party  declarations  were  tyrannical.  They  curtailed  the  power 
of  legislation  and  trampled  upon  the  right  of  free  speech.  On 
slavery  as  on  every  other  subject  he  claimed  the  right  to  be 
heard. 

In  words  almost  prophetic  he  added :  "  The  movement 
against  slavery  is  from  the  Everlasting  Arm.  Even  now  it  is 
gathering  its  forces,  soon  to  be  confessed  everywhere.  It  may 
not  be  felt  yet  in  the  high  places  of  office  and  power,  but  all 
who  can  put  their  ears  humbly  to  the  ground  will  hear  and  com 
prehend  its  incessant  and  advancing  tread." 

For  a  long  time  the  demands  and  the  threats  of  the  South 
had  been  growing.  As  it  reached  out  for  more  territory,  of 
which  to  make  slave  states,  it  became  intolerant  of  opposition. 
The  refusal  of  its  demands  was  met  with  prompt  threats  of  se 
cession  and  complaints  that  the  North  was  not  fair  to  the 
South,  that  while  the  North  had  its  tariff,  largely  favorable  to 
its  manufactures,  it  was  ready  to  wrest  from  the  South  its 
cheap  slave  labor  without  which  the  rice  and  cotton  fields 
could  not  be  tilled  with  profit.  Whoever  advocated  the  aboli 
tion  of  slavery  was,  therefore,  charged  by  the  slave  power 
as  being  a  sectionalist,  as  wishing  to  drive  the  South  out  and 
break  up  the  Union.  Accordingly  an  anti-slavery  party  was  a 
sectional  party,  but  a  pro-slavery  party  was  a  national  party. 
To  be  an  an^-slavery  Whig  was  to  be  a  Sectional  Whig;  but 
to  be  a  pro-slavery  Whig  was  to  be  a  National  Whig.  "  Anti- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  259 

slavery  "  had  become  a  term  of  reproach  in  the  North,  as  well 
as  in  the  South.  Both  the  Whig  and  Democratic  parties  as 
pired  to  be  "  National "  parties  and  they  had  accordingly  both 
become  /?ro-slavery.  It  was  Sumner's  hope  to  remove  from  the 
friends  of  Freedom,  the  opprobrium  of  this  term  "  sectional ". 

This  was  the  title  of  his  speech :  "  Freedom,  national ; 
slavery,  sectional."  He  sought  to  show,  first,  The  true  relation 
of  slavery  to  the  National  Government,  that  there  was  no 
national  power  under  the  Constitution  by  which  it  could  be 
supported,  and,  second,  The  character  of  the  legislation  for  the 
rendition  of  fugitives  from  service,  The  Fugitive  Slave  Law, 
that  it  was  unconstitutional  and  offensive  to  the  principles  of 
our  Government. 

To  show  that  slavery  had  no  support  in  the  Constitution,  he 
quoted  from  the  decisions  of  Lord  Mansfield  and  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Mississippi  and  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Kentucky, 
where  it  was  held  that  if  slavery  existed  at  all,  it  must  be 
by  virtue  of  positive  enactment,  that  a  condition  of  perpetual 
bondage  was  so  contrary  to  human  rights  and  the  law  of  nature 
that  it  could  only  be  created  by  express  enactment,  that  no 
form  of  implication  could  support  it.  He  then  showed  that 
slavery  was  nowhere  mentioned  in  the  Constitution  and  that  all 
its  provisions  made  slavery  impossible,  as  a  National  institution. 
It  could  only  be  derived  by  interpretation,  which  the  authorities 
cited  forbade  and  he  farther  insisted  that  by  no  fair  interpreta 
tion  could  it  be  allowed.  The  preamble  recites  that  the  people  to 
promote  the  general  welfare  and  secure  the  blessings  of  Liberty 
*  *  *  do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitution."  So  the  pur 
pose  of  its  enactment  was  in  opposition  to  slavery.  The  con 
temporary  declarations  in  the  Convention  of  its  framers  con 
firmed  this.  Gouverneur  Morris  who  "  never  would  concur  in 
upholding  domestic  slavery ; "  Elbridge  Gerry,  who  wanted  to 
be  "  careful  not  to  give  any  sanction  to  it ; "  Oliver  Elsworth 
who  thought  "  the  morality  and  wisdom  of  slavery  were  consid 
erations  belonging  to  the  States  themselves;  Roger  Sherman 
who  was  opposed  to  recognizing  slaves  as  property;  and  James 
Madison  who  "  thought  it  wrong  to  admit  in  the  Constitution 
the  idea  that  there  could  be  property  in  men;" — all  showed 
they  designedly  omitted  giving  any  sanction  to  the  existence 
of  slavery  in  the  Constitution.  Jurisdiction  over  the  subject  of 
slavery  was  recognized  as  belonging  exclusively  to  the  States 
and  the  framers  did  not  intend  that  the  Constitution  should 
countenance  it  or  the  national  government  be  in  any  way  re 
sponsible  for  its  existence.  In  the  Massachusetts  convention  to 
ratify  the  Constitution,  General  Heath  had  said  that  by  adopt- 


260  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

ing  it,  they  did  nothing  to  hold  the  blacks  in  slavery  or  to 
partake  of  other  men's  sins  for  it;  and  this  seemed  to  be  the 
sentiment  of  the  convention. 

He  argued  that  the  political  acts  of  a  nation,  like  statutes  in 
pari  materiel,  ought  to  be  construed  together.  The  Declaration 
of  Independence  should  be  read  with  the  Constitution,  each 
to  throw  light  upon  the  construction  to  be  given  to  the  other. 
It  commences  with  the  self-evident  truth,  that  "  all  men  are 
created  equal,  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with 
certain  unalienable  rights;  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  that  to  secure  these  rights  gov 
ernments  are  instituted  among  men."  Notice  that  the  rights 
for  which  the  Colonists  were  struggling  were  the  liberty  and 
equality  which  belonged  to  them  as  to  all  men.  After  the  war 
for  these  principles  had  successfully  closed  the  Continental 
Congress  in  an  address  to  the  States  confirmed  the  doctrine  of 
the  Declaration  by  saying,  "  it  had  ever  been  the  pride  and 
boast  of  America  that  the  rights  for  which  she  contended  were 
the  rights  of  human  nature."  The  Constitution  by  refusing  to 
recognize  slavery  confirmed  the  same  universal  right  to  liberty 
and  equality  as  the  Declaration  and  the  Address. 

The  rule  of  interpretation  handed  down  from  the  English 
Common  Law,  not  to  be  neglected  in  determining  whether 
slavery  found  any  support  in  the  Constitution,  was  that  in  any 
question  under  this  instrument,  "  every  word  must  be  con 
strued  in  favor  of  Liberty.  Slavery  was  not  to  be  supported 
by  interpretation  or  by  implication  unless  clearly  within  the 
intention  of  the  framers.  In  cases  of  doubtful  construction, 
the  doubt  was  to  be  resolved  in  favor  of  liberty.  Following 
this  rule  of  construction,  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  refused  to  recognize  slaves  as  property  or  otherwise  than 
as  persons,  saying  that  the  power  over  slavery  belonged  to  the 
States  respectively,  it  was  local  in  its  character  and  in  its  effects 
(15  Peters  507). 

Thus  from  every  point  of  view,  Sumner  concluded,  that 
slavery  was  not  a  National,  but  a  Sectional,  institution.  Free 
dom  alone  was  National. 

Such  a  construction  of  the  Constitution  and  of  the  powers  of 
the  National  Government,  he  argued,  was  confirmed  by  the 
history  and  prevailing  sentiment  of  the  time  of  their  formation. 
When  that  Government  was  organized  there  was  not  a  slave 
anywhere  within  the  National  territory.  The  great  men  who 
organized  it,  Washington,  Adams,  Hamilton,  Jay  and  Jefferson, 
Patrick  Henry,  "  the  orator  of  liberty  "  and  William  Pinkney, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  261 

"the  acknowledged  head  of  the  American  Bar,"  all  concurred 
in  condemning  it. 

One  of  the  earliest  acts  of  the  first  Congress  under  the  Con 
stitution  was  to  ratify  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  forever  prohibit 
ing  slavery  in  the  North  West  Territory,  thus  saving  this  broad 
tract  to  freedom.  Abolition  societies  of  Virginia  and  Penn 
sylvania  alike  petitioned  this  same  Congress  in  behalf  of  the 
slaves.  Franklin,  then  eighty-four  years  of  age,  set  his  name  as 
president  of  one  Society  to  the  petition  from  his  State,  asking 
Congress  to  t(  step  to  the  very  verge  of  the  power  vested  in  it  for 
discouraging  every  species  of  traffic  in  the  persons  of  our  fellow 
men/'  The  policy  then  was,  not  the  nationalization  of  slavery, 
but  the  denationalization  of  it.  In  the  conventions  to  consider 
the  Constitution,  several  of  the  States  expressed  fears  for  the 
indefiniteness  of  some  of  its  provisions  and  in  accordance  with 
their  suggestions,  the  first  Congress  presented  to  the  States  for 
adoption  this  clause,  which  afterwards  being  ratified,  became 
the  Tenth  Amendment ;  "  The  powers  not  delegated  to  the 
United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the 
States  are  reserved  to  the  States  respectively  or  to  the  people." 
Thus  not  having  provided  for  slavery  in  the  Constitution,  in 
express  terms,  or  by  any  fair  implication,  they  went  farther 
and  reserved  all  authority  over  every  such  question  to  the 
State.  So  there  being  no  power  in  the  National  Government 
to  create  a  system  of  slavery,  all  national  legislation  upholding 
it  was  unconstitutional  and  void. 

Sumner  also  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  on  the  recom 
mendation  of  the  first  C  Digress,  another  Amendment  had  been 
added  to  the  Constitu^  "  No  person  shall  be  deprived  of 
life,  liberty  or  property  ^  due  process  of  law"  lie  argued 

that  the  force  of  this  Amendment,  as  a  safeguard  of  Freedom 
was  greater  as  shown  by  its  history  than  even  its  emphatic 
language  showed.  As  originally  recommended,  it  read :  "  No 
freeman  ought  to  be  deprived  of  his  life,  liberty  or  property 
but  by  the  law  of  the  land"  But  Congress  had  rejected  it  in 
this  form  and  refused  to  confine  this  great  bill  of  rights  to 
•freemen  alone,  b-ut  had  extended  it  to  etiery  person,  "  whether 
Caucasian,  Indian  or  African, — from  the  President  to  the 
slave."  They  forbade  liberty  to  be  taken  from  any  one,  except 
by  some  regular  process  of  the  law,  as  indictment  or  present 
ment. 

The  application  of  these  principles,  he  argued,  the  funda 
mental  principles  of  the  Republic,  if  carried  out  in  the  spirit 
of  their  adoption,  would  abolish  slavery  everywhere  from 
National  territory,  make  it  impossible  upon  the  high  seas,  under 


262  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

our  flag,  stop  it  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  prevent  the  sanc 
tion  of  Congress  to  the  admission  of  slave  States,  the  Govern 
ment  to  support  slavery  or  to  hunt  slaves. 

"  And  yet,"  he  said  "  politicians  of  the  hour  undertake  to 
place  these  convictions  under  formal  ban.  The  slave  masters 
few  in  number,  amounting  to  not  more  than  three  hundred  and 
fifty  thousand,  according  to  the  recent  census,  have  succeeded 
in  dictating  the  policy  of  the  National  Government,  and  have 
written  slavery  on  its  front.  The  change  which  began  in  the 
desire  for  wealth,  was  aggravated  by  the  desire  for  political 
predominance.  Through  slavery  the  cotton  crop  increased, 
with  its  enriching  gains ;  through  slavery,  States  became  part 
of  the  Slave  Power.  And  now  an  arrogant  and  unrelenting 
ostracism  is  applied,  not  only  to  all  who  express  themselves 
against  slavery,  but  to  every  man  unwilling  to  be  its  menial.  A 
novel  test  for  office  is  introduced,  which  would  have  excluded  all 
the  Fathers  of  the  Republic, — even  Washington,  Jefferson  and 
Franklin ! " 

"  This  single  fact  reveals  the  extent  to  which  the  National 
Government  has  departed  from  its  true  course  and  its  great 
examples.  For  myself,  I  know  no  better  aim  under  the  Consti 
tution  than  to  bring  the  Government  back  to  the  precise  posi 
tion  on  this  question  it  occupied  on  the  auspicious  morning  of 
its  first  organization  by  Washington, —  *  *  *  that  the  sentiments 
of  the  Fathers  may  again  prevail  with  our  rulers,  and  the  Na 
tional  Flag  may  nowhere  shelter  slavery." 

Sumner  then  passed  to  the  second  branch  of  his  subject,  the 
nature  of  the  provision  for  the  rendition  of  fugitives  from 
service,  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law. 

He  argued  from  the  Debates  in  the  Convention  that  when  the 
Constitution  was  framed  no  such  power  was  claimed  for  Con 
gress  as  was  exercised  in  the  passage  of  this  law.  The  subject 
of  the  recovery  of  fugitive  slaves  was  brought  before  the  Con 
vention  once,  about  the  time  of  its  adjournment  and  then  the 
proposition  to  give  Congress  power  over  the  subject  was 
promptly  objected  to  and  it  was  as  promptly  withdrawn.  It  was 
proposed  to  amend  the'clause  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from 
justice  to  make  it  also  include  the  surrender  of  slaves  as  well 
as  criminals.  When  the  amendment  was  withdrawn,  the  clause 
for  the  surrender  of  criminals  was  unanimously  adopted  as  it 
now  appears  in  the  Constitution.  The  clause  for  the  surrender 
of  persons  bound  to  service  had  no  reference  to  slavery  and 
was  adopted  without  debate  and  without  opposition.  The  claim 
of  the  slaveholders  that  this  clause  referred  to  slaves  and  was 
adopted  by  way  of  compromise  was,  as  shown  by  the  Debates, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  263 

absolutely  without  foundation.  The  States  in  ratifying  the 
Constitution  did  not  make  such  a  claim  in  their  Convention 
nor  did  the  men  who  had  assisted  to  frame  it. 

The  first  assumption  of  the  power  to  pass  such  a  law,  appeared 
in  the  Act  of  Congress  of  1793,  when  it  was  tacked  on  to  a  law 
for  the  reclamation  of  criminals.  In  this  apparently  accidental 
manner,  without  attracting  attention,  it  crept  into  the  Statutes. 
More  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  elapsed,  before  it  was  success 
fully  enforced.  In  1801  and  again  in  1817,  an  effort  was  made 
to  secure  more  effective  legislation  on  the  subject;  but  both  at 
tempts  failed.  It  was  not  until  1850  that  the  first  really  effi 
cient  legislation,  in  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  was  enacted. 

Speaking  of  this  law,  for  whose  repeal  he  was  arguing,  Sum- 
ner  declared:  " There  is  no  safeguard  of  Human  Freedom 
which  the  Monster  Act  does  not  set  at  nought.  It  commits 
this  great  question  ( of  a  man's  liberty ?  not  to  a  solemn  trial, 
but  to  summary  proceedings.  It  commits  it  not  to  one  of  the 
high  tribunals  of  the  land,  but  to  the  unaided  judgment  of  a 
petty  magistrate.  It  commits  it  to  a  magistrate  appointed,  not 
by  the  President  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate,  but  by  the 
Court,  holding  office,  not  during  good  behavior,  but  merely  dur 
ing  the  will  of  the  Court  and  receiving  not  a  regular  salary, 
but  fees  according  to.  each  individual  case.  It  authorizes 
judgment  on  ex  parte  evidence,  without  the  sanction  of  a 
cross-examination.  It  denies  the  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus,  ever 
known  as  the  Paladium  of  the  citizen.  Contrary  to  the  declared 
purposes  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  it  sends  the  fugitive 
back  '  at  the  public  expense ?.  It  bribes  the  Commissioner  by 
a  double  stipend  to  pronounce  against  Freedom.  If  he  dooms 
a  man  to  slavery,  the  reward  is  ten  dollars ;  but  saving  him  to 
freedom,  his  dole  is  five.  It  visits  with  penalties  the  faithful 
men  and  women  who  render  to  the  fugitive  slave  the  succor  and 
shelter  which  religion  requires  to  be  given  to  the  poor  and  the 
oppressed.  According  to  the  experience  of  all  civilized  nations 
there  should  be  an  end  to  the  right  to  bring  a  suit  fixed  by 
statutes  of  limitation,  but  this  act  permits  proceedings  against 
those  enjoying  freedom  without  any  reference  to  the  lapse  of 
time." 

Sumner  insisted  that  the  law  was  a  usurpation  by  Congress  of 
powers  not  granted  by  the  Constitution,  that  it  was  not  within 
the  express  powers  granted,  nor  could  it  be  fairly  implied 
from  any  general  grant,  that  the  law  was  also  unconstitutional 
because  it  deprived  the  person  apprehended  of  the  right  of 
trial  by  jury,  the  Constitution  providing  that  "  no  person  shall 
be  deprived  of  life,  liberty  or  property,  without  due  process  of 


264  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

law"  in  other  words,  as  interpreted,  without  a  regular  suit  at 
law,  with  trial  by  jury.  It  further  provided  that,  "  in  suits  at 
common  law  where  the  value  in  controversy  shall  exceed  twenty 
dollars,  the  right  of  trial  by  jury  shall  be  preserved/'  and  he 
maintained  that  a  suit  to  recover  a  fugitive  was  within  the 
purview  of  this  clause,  for  a  man's  freedom  was  above  all  price 
and  hence  without  doubt  of  more  than  twenty  dollars  in  value. 

He  drew  a  parallel  between  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  the 
British  Stamp  Act,  that  had  excited  the  revolt  of  the  Colonies 
against  the  Mother  country,  showing  that  the  same  disregard 
of  the  provisions  of  the  British  constitution,  the  same  denial 
of  the  right  of  trial  by  jury  existed  in  both.  And  he  insisted 
that  the  same  injustice  in  the  one  had  provoked  the  same  re 
sistance  as  it  must  in  the  other,  that  neither  could  be  enforced. 
"  In  the  face  of  an  awakened  community,  where  discussion 
had  free  scope,  no  men  though  supported  by  office  and  wealth 
could  long  maintain  injustice.  The  Stamp  Act  was  discussed 
and  understood.  Its  violation  of  constitutional  rights  was 
exposed.  In  the  charnel-house  of  history,  with  unclean  things 
of  the  Past  it  rots.  Thither  the  Slave  Act  would  follow." 

This  law,  he  argued,  could  not  be  enforced  and,  if  not,  it 
should  be  repealed.  It  lacked  the  essential  support  of  the  public 
conscience  in  the  States  where  it  was  to.be  enforced.  This  was 
the  life  of  every  law  and  without  it  a  statute  could  be  only  empty 
words.  The  law  that  could  be  enforced  only  by  the  bayonet, 
was  no  law.  The  attempts  to  enforce  it  had  been  signal  failures. 
At  Buffalo,  the  fugitive  was  knocked,  by  a  log  of  wood,  against 
a  red  hot  stove  and  his  trial  commenced,  while  the  blood  still 
oozed  from  his  wounded  head.  At  Syracuse,  an  unexpected  mob 
surrounded  the  prisoner  and  rescued  him.  The  same  thing 
occurred  in  Boston,  at  the  first  attempt  to  execute  the  law,  when 
a  crowd  of  colored  men  forced  their  way  into  the  court-room, 
rescued  the  prisoner  and  allowed  him  to  escape  to  Canada.  In 
another  instance  when  a  slave-hunter  appeared  in  the  city  to 
reclaim  a  fugitive  and  his  wife,  by  some  of  the  first  citizens, 
they  were  secreted  and  conveyed  on  board  a  vessel  and  sent  to 
England.  In  still  a  third  case,  the  slave  was  arrested  on  the 
pretext  that  he  was  a  criminal,  only  after  a  deadly  struggle, 
tried,  with  the  weight  of  the  Administration  at  Washington 
against  him,  to  make  it  a  test  case,  in  a  court-house  girdled  with 
chains,  convicted  and  escorted  to  the  vessel,  that  was  to  return 
him  to  slavery,  by  three  hundred  armed  policemen,  while  the 
pulpit  and  the  people  of  Boston  trembled  with  indignation  at 
the  unaccustomed  sight.  At  Harrisburg,  the  fugitive  was  shot ; 
at  Christiana,  the  slave-hunter  was  shot.  At  New  York  every 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  265 

attempt  to  enforce  the  law  was  attended  with  strife.  A  law 
that  produced  no  better  results  should  be  at  once  repealed. 

Sumner  produced  an  autograph  letter  of  Washington  that  had 
never  before  been  made  public.  He  was  writing  to  a  friend  in 
the  North  desiring  his  good  offices  in  the  return  of  a  fugitive 
slave  woman  to  whom  her  mistress,  Lady  Washington,  was 
attached.  But  he  enjoined  upon  him  caution  in  what  he  did, 
that  nothing  should  be  done  for  her  recovery  that  "  would  ex 
cite  a  mob  or  riot  *  *  *  or  even  uneasy  sensations  in  the  minds  of 
well-disposed  citizens/'  The  fugitive  was  never  returned.  And 
Washington  never  made  any  farther  effort  for  her  recovery — 
an  example  of  forbearance,  in  strange  contrast  with  the  spirit 
of  this  law  and  of  the  attempts  made  to  enforce  it ! 

What  then  was  to  be  the  remedy,  for  the  loss  by  the  South  of 
its  fugitive  slaves?  Sumner  insisted  that  the  Nation  had  no 
power  to  legislate  on  this  subject,  that  it  was  exclusively  within 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  States,  that  each  State  must  determine 
for  itself  the  precise  extent  of  its  obligation  and  that  in  any 
law  passed  by  them  the  fugitive  slaves  must  not  be  denied  the 
right  of  trial  by  jury  and  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus:  that  they 
must  be  allowed  to  face  and  cross-examine  the  witnesses  against 
them  and  to  testify  themselves  and  to  produce  evidence  in 
their  own  behalf. 

Sumner  occupied  three  hours  and  forty-five  minutes  in 
the  delivery  of  the  speech.  The  Senate  gave  him  good  attention 
and  no  one  sought  to  interrupt  him.  The  speech  was  unex 
pected  but  when  the  word  was  passed  around  that  he  was  speak 
ing,  the  galleries  and  the  floor  were  soon  occupied  with  persons 
who  wished  to  hear  what  he  had  to  say.  His  colleague  John 
Davis  was  behind  the  Speaker's  chair  when  the  vote  was  taken 
on  Sumner's  amendment.  It  was  strange  doctrine  to  him. 
Mr.  Seward  was  also  absent  and  did  not  vote.  Mr.  Web 
ster  came  in  during  the  speech  and  remained  quietly  listening 
for  an  hour  or  more.  No  one  knows  what  thoughts  were  pass 
ing  through  his  mind,  but  it  would  have  been  interesting 
to  see  the  fitful  shadows  come  and  go  as  the  old  statesman  sat 
listening  to  the  words  of  the  young  man  who  had  dragged  his 
own  record  to  the  bar  of  his  constituents  and  had  been  returned 
to  the  Senate  to  teach  the  Nation  these  very  principles  of  Lib 
erty  and  Equality  that  he  had  betrayed.  Already  the  man  to 
whom  he  was  listening  was  fulfilling  the  prediction,  that  he 
had  made  of  him  when  a  boy,  that  his  country  had  a  pledge 
of  him. 

The  Senate  did  not  intend  to  have  a  discussion  of  slavery 
precipitated  upon  it,  so  close  to  its  adjournment.  Clemens  of 


266  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Alabama,  who  first  secured  the  floor  after  Sumner,  expressed 
the  hope  that  none  of  his  friends  would  reply  to  Sumner's 
speech,  that  "  the  barking  of  a  puppy  never  did  any  harm." 
But  the  feeling  of  the  pro-slavery  Senators  was  aroused.  Bad 
ger  of  North  Carolina  undertook  to  reply  to  Sumner  at  length. 
To  prove  what  he  claimed  was  the  pernicious  influence  of  Sum 
ner,  in  inciting  the  people  to  acts  of  violence,  he  quoted  largely 
from  his  speech  in  Faneuil  Hall,  on  November  6, 1850,  in  which 
he  had  arraigned  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill.  This  led  Hale  of 
New  Hampshire,  in  answering  him,  to  remark  that  the  quota 
tions  were  the  best  part  of  Badger's  speech.  Weller  of  Cali 
fornia  argued  that  Sumner's  course  was  calculated  to  bring 
upon  him  the  blood  of  murdered  men,  that  whoever  "  counsels 
murder  is  himself  a  murderer."  Twenty  Senators  took  part  in 
the  debate  but  only  two,  Chase  and  Hale,  defended  Sumner's 
position.  It  continued  until  seven  p.  M.  when  it  was  inter 
rupted  by  Mr.  Hunter  asking  that  the  consideration  of  the  Ap 
propriation  Bill  be  proceeded  with  by  the  Senate.  When  the 
vote  was  taken  on  the  amendment  proposed  by  Sumner  there 
were  only  four  in  its  favor,  Chase,  Hale,  Sumner  and  Wade; 
while  forty-seven  voted  against  it.  Twelve  years  later  Sumner 
reported  to  the  Senate  and  without  difficulty  carried  the  repeal 
of  this  same  law. 

The  speech  revealed  to  the  Senate  the  character  of  Sumner. 
Often  before  anti-slavery  men  had  appeared  in  Congress  but 
they  hesitated  before  the  superior  numbers  of  the  opposition  and 
almost  without  exception  had  allowed  themselves  to  be  cajoled 
or  driven  from  the  field.  With  some  of  them  there  was  an  ap 
parent  want  of  sincerity,  a  half  apologetic  maintenance  of  their 
views.  With  Hale  who  was  one  of  the  earliest  and  bravest, 
there  was  a  disposition  to  speak  lightly  of  his  cause  in  private 
conversation,  which,  with  a  certain  want  of  aggressiveness  in 
public,  gave  his  colleagues  reason  to  doubt  his  sincerity.  Now 
the  pro-slavery  people  realized  that  they  had  a  man  to  meet  in 
public  life,  who  meant  what  he  said,  who  never  spoke  slight 
ingly  of  his  cause,  who  had  no  doubt  he  was  right,  who  did  not 
wait  for  supporters,  who  belonged  to  no  party  and  would 
recognize  no  party  whip  and  who  without  fear  and  without 
compromise,  would  fight  and  if  defeated  would  fight  again  and 
still  fight  on  until  he  was  victorious.  Here  was  a  man  they 
could  not  control,  a  man  who  had  the  gift  of  eloquence,  that 
from  his  vantage  ground  in  the  Senate,  gave  him  a  peculiar 
power  of  reaching  the  people.  It  was  this  feeling,  admitted  by 
them  in  private,  that  aroused  their  violent  antipathy  to  Sumner 
at  a  later  day. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  267 

One  of  the  apparent  faults,  which  even  his  friends  must  ad 
mit  in  Sumner's  character,  was  his  egotism.  He  had  the  most 
absolute  confidence  in  his  own  convictions;  he  did  not  doubt 
that  he  was  right  in  his  conclusions  and  he  could  not  see  how 
others  could  have  opinions  different  from  his  and  still  be  sin 
cere.  He  was  intolerant  of  opposition  and  aggressive  towards 
those  who  did  not  agree  with  him.  He  insisted  upon  pushing 
his  own  measures  to  the  front  and  upon  discussing  them  fully. 
This  often  caused  friction  and  created  feeling  among  his 
colleagues  and  it  was  often  urged  against  him  as  a  weakness. 
His  enemies  made  much  of  it.  But  what  would  Charles  Sumner 
have  been  in  the  Senate  without  it.  If  he  had  been  of  a  doubt 
ing,  hesitating  character,  questioning  his  own  convictions  and 
deferring  to  those  of  others,  stopping  to  be  agreeable  and 
waiting  the  pleasure  of  his  colleagues  to  present  his  own  meas 
ures,  what  would  he  have  accomplished  in  the  Senate  in  1851 
and  the  succeeding  years?  It  was  this  largely  that  made  him 
what  he  was, — the  fearless,  constant  and,  finally,  successful 
leader.  His  times  demanded  a  man  not  only  of  his  talents, 
but  of  his  faults  also. 

His  speech  satisfied  the  expectations  of  his  friends.  It  was 
what  they  had  looked  for  when  he  was  elected.  The  anxiety 
of  some,  for  fear  he  had  been  captured  by  the  society  of  the  Cap 
itol  and  in  consequence  had  lost  his  enthusiasm  for  the  cause, 
and  the  apprehension  of  others,  who  knew  him  better  and  ap 
preciated  his  circumstances  and  feared  that  he  might  not  be 
able  to  get  an  opportunity  to  be  heard,  alike  were  turned  to  a 
feeling  of  congratulation  over  the  success  he  had  scored.  Wil 
son,  when  he  read  it,  pronounced  it  "  glorious  "  and  at  once 
wrote  Sumner  how  pleased  he  was  that  God  had  given  him  the 
power  to  aid  in  placing  such  a  man  in  the  Senate.  William  Cul- 
len  Bryant,  with  a  touch  of  sarcasm,  declared  the  speech  was  the 
only  thing  which  preserved  the  character  of  this  Senate.  Others 
thought  it  the  ablest  of  all  Sumner's  speeches ;  while  still  others, 
pro-slavery  in  sentiment,  declared  it  would  do  more  mischief 
than  any  speech  ever  made  in  the  country.  Several  hundred 
thousand  copies  were  distributed  in  America ;  it  was  translated 
into  German  and  two  or  more  editions  appeared  in  England. 
It  had  not  secured  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law.  Such 
a  result  could  not  be  hoped  for  now.  But  it  was  an  able 
presentation  of  the  anti-slavery  side  of  the  question,  delivered 
from  a  position,  where  it  would  -command  attention,  printed 
and  circulated  under  the  Nation's  frank.  It  arrested  public 
attention  and  called  a  halt  in  the  onward  march  of  events.  It . 
also  became  a  mine  of  argument  for  the  opponents  of  slavery. 


268  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

After  the  delivery  of  the  speech,  Sumner  continued  in  his 
seat  for  the  remainder  of  the  day's  session.  In  the  farther  con 
sideration  of  the  Appropriation  Bill,  it  was  proposed  to  amend 
it,  so  as  to  allow  the  widow  of  Andrew  J.  Downing,  Superin 
tendent  of  Public  Grounds,  in  Washington  an  additional  al 
lowance,  equal  to  a  year's  salary,  in  consideration  of  her  re- 
linquishment  of  all  claim  for  her  deceased  husband's  models 
and  drawings  designed  for  the  Government.  Upon  this  amend 
ment  Sumner  spoke  briefly. 

Four  days  later  the  Session  closed.  His  brother  George  had 
returned  from  Europe  after  eleven  years  absence.  He  came  on 
to  Washington  during  the  session  and  he  and  Charles  occupied 
rooms  together.  Their  separation  had  been  a  long  one  but 
there  had  been  little  diminution  in  the  warmth  of  their  affec 
tion.  Age  and  attainments  had  added  to  their  appreciation  of 
one  another.  They  had  kept  up  a  frequent  correspondence  and 
by  the  exchange  of  thoughts  and  opinions  had  maintained  an 
interest  in  each  others  plans.  Charles  had  been  disturbed  at 
George's  protracted  absence  and  felt  that  he  was  not  using  pre 
cious  years  to  the  best  advantage.  But  George  had  been  study 
ing  the  languages  and  institutions  of  European  countries  and 
came  home  thoroughly  equipped  on  these  subjects.  The 
Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Webster,  wished  to  avail  himself 
of  this  knowledge  and  offered  him  an  appointment  in  his  de 
partment,  but  in  the  stress  of  feeling  upon  the  slavery  ques 
tion  asked  some  pledge  of  a  difference  of  political  views  from 
his  brother  Charles,  which  George  felt  would  be  unbecoming 
in  him  to  grant  and  in  consequence  declined  the  appointment. 
George  had  a  high  sense  of  honor  and  was  a  careful  student  of 
men  and  events,  was  more  conservative  than  Charles  and  had 
little  sympathy  for  the  anti-slavery  views  of  his  brother,  but  he 
lacked  his  aggressiveness,  his  all  absorbing  industry  and  his 
high  ideals. 

Sumner,  as  became  customary  with  him  afterwards,  tarried 
at  the  close  of  the  session  in  Washington.  He  did  not  return 
to  Boston  till  shortly  before  the  Free-Soil  State  Convention, 
held  at  Lowell  on  September  15.  He  spoke  there  briefly,  urg 
ing  the  necessity  for  a  third  political  party  devoted  to  the  cause 
of  Freedom.  He  was  received  by  the  convention  with  enthu 
siastic  demonstrations.  But  he  soon  went  to  Newport  to  visit 
his  brother  Horace  and  remained  there  till  late  in  the  fall.  He 
took  little  or  no  part  in  the  campaign. 

In  this  he  made  a  mistake.  The  Free-Soilers  had  hoped  with 
the  aid  of  Democratic  votes,  to  carry  the  State  and  secure 
the  seat  of  John  Davis  in  the  Senate  and  also  to  elect  a  Legis- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  269 

lature  and  several  Members  of  Congress.  They  failed  every 
where  except  in  the  election  of  one  Member  of  Congress.  In 
some  Districts  the  majorities  against  them  were  exceedingly 
small.  Wilson  lacked  one  hundred  votes  of  an  election  to 
Congress;  Adams,  four  hundred;  and  two  others,  only  two 
hundred  each.  The  failure  of  these  friends,  by  such  narrow 
margins,  caused  some  criticism  of  Sumner's  course,  at  party 
headquarters,  and  it  found  its  way  into  certain  journals.  But 
it  did  not  spread  widely  enough  to  affect  his  standing  with  the 
masses. 

He  was  tired  of  politics.  He  had  seen  so  much  at  Washington 
and  besides  he  was  not  a  politician.  For  his  seat  in  the  Senate 
he  had,  as  yet,  little  attachment  and  probably  did  not  care 
whether  he  was  to  continue  in  it  or  not.  He  held  it  more  as  a 
duty  that  had  been  laid  upon  him,  which  he  was  to  carry 
through  and  terminate  with  honor,  than  as  a  prize  to  be  cov 
eted.  It  had  not  been  a  bed  of  roses  for  him,  but  a  toilsome 
road,  fraught  with  criticism  and  care,  involving  a  separation 
from  his  friends  and  his  books.  In  time  these  things  changed. 
He  lost  much  of  his  love  of  retirement,  made  warm  friends  at 
Washington  among  his  associates,  enjoyed  the  applause  of  his 
fellow  men,  liked  to  stand  in  the  forefront  of  the  battle  and 
wield  a  political  influence.  Perhaps  some  misgivings  at  the 
results  of  this  campaign  and  of  his  course  in  it  troubled  him; 
for  after  this  he  took  an  active  part  in  campaigns  and  recog 
nized  his  party's  claim  upon  him. 


CHAPTER    XX 

SESSION    OF    1852-3 — MEMBER    OF    MASSACHUSETTS    CONSTITU 
TIONAL      CONVENTION CAMPAIGN      OF      1853 COALITION 

DEFEATED SUMNER^S       ISOLATION NEBRASKA       DEBATE 

ITS   EFFECT PETITION  TO  REPEAL  FUGITIVE  SLAVE   LAW 

THE    DEBATE RECEPTION    AT    HOME JOINS    THE    REPUB 
LICAN  PARTY LECTURE  ON  GRANVILLE  SHARP 

DURING  the  session  of  Congress  commencing  December  1, 
1852,  and  ending  March  4,  1853,  there  was  no  general  discus 
sion  in  the  Senate  of  the  slavery  question.  The  Presidential 
campaign  had  just  closed  and  the  session  being  short,  each  side 
was  content  to  let  it  rest  for  the  present.  Sumner  was  diligent 
in  his  attendance  upon  the  meetings  of  the  Senate,  but  did  not 
take  much  part  in  the  discussions.  He  spoke  twice  only ;  once, 
advocating  a  bill  authorizing  the  President  to  appoint  Super 
intendents  for  the  Armories,  who  did  not  belong  to  the  Army ; 
and  once  against  secrecy  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Senate.  He 
was  still  excluded  from  a  place  on  the  Committees  of  the  Senate 
because  "  he  was  outside  of  any  healthy  political  organization." 
He  was  not  a  controlling  factor  in  its  deliberations.  He  had  not 
been  in  the  Senate  long  enough  to  acquire  that  readiness  in  its 
current  business  which  he  displayed  after  the  advent  of  his 
party  to  power  in  1861.  Seward  urged  him  to  greater  activity 
in  this  direction  and  his  friends  at  home  thought  he  could  thus 
remove  the  imputation  of  his  enemies  that  he  was  a  man  of  one 
idea. 

But  he  still  felt  ill  at  ease  in  the  Senate.  "You  may  be 
curious,  dear  William,"  he  wrote  Story  at  Rome,  "  to  know 
how  I  regard  my  Senatorial  life.  Very  much  as  I  anticipated. 
My  earnest  counsel  to  all  would  be  to  avoid  public  life,  unless 
impelled  by  some  overmastering  conviction  or  sentiment  which 
could  best  find  utterance  in  this  way.  Surely,  but  for  this  I 
would  not  continue  in  it  another  day.  To  what  the  world  calls 
its  honors  I  am  indifferent;  its  cares  and  responsibilities  are 
weighty  and  absorbing.  I  no  longer  feel  at  ease  with  a  book;  if 
I  take  one  to  read  my  attention  is  disturbed  by  some  important 
question  which  will  tramp  through  my  mind.  How  often  I 
think  with  envy  of  you  at  Rome  enjoying  letters  and  art !  No 
such  days  for  me !  At  Washington  I  have  much  social  kindness, 

270 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  271 

beyond  anything  I  have  known  of  late  in  Boston.  With  most  of 
the  Southern  men  my  relations  have  been  pleasant,  while  with 
Soule  I  have  been  on  terms  of  intimate  friendship.  Here  in 
Boston,  Hunkerism  is  very  bitter;  Webster's  friends  are  im 
placable.  The  Courier,  which  is  their  paper,  has  attacked 
Dana  and  myself;  and  others  like  to  show  their  spite  also.  The 
Webster  dementia  has  not  yet  passed  away." 

To  another  correspondent  he  wrote :  "  On  the  floor  of  the 
Senate  I  sit  between  Mr.  Butler  of  South  Carolina,  the  early 
suggester  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill  and  Mr.  Mason  of  Vir 
ginia,  its  final  author,  with  both  of  whom  I  have  constant  and 
cordial  intercourse.  This  experience  would  teach  me  if  I  needed 
the  lesson  to  shun  harsh  and  personal  criticism  of  those  from 
whom  I  differ."  But  we  shall  see  that  this  friendly  relation  did 
not  continue  long. 

During  his  absence  from  Massachusetts,  the  second  conven 
tion  was  called  to  revise  the  Constitution  of  the  State.  The 
existing  one  was  framed  in  1780  and  a  convention  had  been 
called  to  revise  it  in  1820.  The  proposition  for  its  revision  now 
came  from  and  was  carried  by  a  coalition  of  the  Free-Soilers 
and  the  Democrats.  Its  purpose  was  to  change  the  basis  of 
representation  in  the  Legislature  and  secure  some  minor 
changes.  The  basis  of  representation  was  not  satisfactory  to 
the  Free-Soilers  and  Democrats.  As  it  was,  it  permitted  the 
cities,  the  centres  of  Whig  strength,  to  vote  for  the  whole  num 
ber  of  members  to  which  they  were  separately  entitled.  For  in 
stance,  Boston  was  entitled  to  forty-four  members.  If  any  one 
of  them  were  elected,  the  whole  forty-four  were  reasonably  sure 
to  be.  As  the  city  of  Boston  was  almost  certainly  Whig,  this 
gave  her  an  immense  power  in  legislation.  Certain  districts  of 
the  city  were  Free-Soil  and  certain  others  Democratic.  If  the 
city  was  districted  both  of  these  parties  might  hope  to  elect 
some  members.  But  under  the  existing  plan  of  voting  a 
general  ticket,  there  was  no  hope  of  the  Democrats  or  Free- 
Soilers  electing  a  member,  while  the  Whigs  maintained  their 
present  majority  in  the  city. 

The  manner  of  choosing  members  of  the  Convention  per 
mitted  districts  to  elect  citizens  of  the  State  who  were  not 
residents  of  the  district.  Wilson  who  was  the  leading  spirit  of 
the  coalition,  and  whose  influence  was  felt  everywhere,  was 
diligent  in  suggesting  the  names  of  prominent  Free-Soilers  and 
even  Democrats,  who  had  no  hope  of  an  election  in  their  home 
districts,  to  other  districts  and  advising  their  nomination  where 
he  knew  they  were  strong.  This  would  secure  greater  certainty 
of  their  election  and  likewise  the  services  of  abler  men  in  the 


272  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Convention,  than  might  otherwise  be  chosen.  In  this  way  the 
name  of  Sumner  was  suggested  to  the  Marshfield  district  and  he 
was  nominated  and  elected  in  his  absence.  It  was  Webster's 
home  district  and  he  was  elected  over  Webster's  son  Fletcher, 
who  was  the  candidate  of  the  Whigs.  It  was  not  according  to 
Sumner's  wish.  For  the  sitting  of  the  Convention  would 
occupy  his  vacation  for  rest  and  recreation  and  he  had  already 
planned  a  visit  to  the  West  where  he  had  never  been.  But  he 
gave  up  his  cherished  trip  and  consented  to  serve,  feeling  that 
it  was  a  duty  he  owed  to  his  party  and  his  friends. 

In  point  of  ability,  the  Convention  well  represented  the 
State.  Among  its  members  were  Rufus  Choate,  George  S. 
Boutwell,  Henry  Wilson,  Henry  Dawes,  Robert  Rantoul,  Sr., 
Marcus  Morton,  afterwards  Chief  Justice  of  the  State,  R.  H. 
Dana,  Jr.,  Geo.  S.  Hillard,  Simon  Greenleaf,  B.  F.  Butler,  N. 
P.  Banks,  afterwards  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
and  others  hardly  less  prominent.  Adams  was  a  candidate,  but 
was  not  elected.  Palfrey  failed  of  a  nomination.  It  began  its 
sessions  in  Boston  on  May  fourth. 

The  work  of  the  Convention  upon  the  different  parts  of  the 
Constitution  was  apportioned  to  separate  committees.  Sumner 
was  made  chairman  of  the  committee  on  the  Bill  of  Rights. 
He  was  also  a  member  of  the  committee  to  draft  the  proposi 
tions  to  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  people.  He  prepared  a 
clause,  providing  how  other  conventions  to  revise  the  Constitu 
tion,  in  the  future,  might  be  called,  which  was  adopted.  He 
was  diligent  in  his  attendance  at  the  sessions  of  the  Convention 
and  in  the  work  of  his  committees.  The  committee  on  the  Bill 
of  Rights,  of  which  he  was  made  chairman,  held  twenty  ses 
sions,  more,  as  Sumner  believed,  than  any  other  committee. 
When  its  work  was  completed  Sumner  made  its  report  to  the 
Convention,  accompanying  it  with  an  address  in  which  he 
reviewed  the  work  of  the  committee,  set  forth  the  reasons  for 
the  changes  they  had  made  and  reviewed  the  origin  and  history 
of  the  Bill  of  Rights  as  a  part  of  our  Constitution. 

In  a  convention  numbering  among  its  members  so  many 
able  speakers  it  was  natural  that  there  should  be  much  good 
speaking.  The  palm  of  eloquence  in  its  deliberations,  was  gen 
erally  conceeded  to  Rufus  Choate,  then  in  the  full  tide  of  his 
professional  success  and  ever  one  of  the  most  accomplished  men. 
But  Sumner  had  his  admirers.  They  regretted,  however,  that 
he  did  not  mix  more  freely  in  the  miscellaneous  debates  of  the 
Convention  and  observed  that  he  seemed  diffident  about  speak 
ing,  except  on  important  questions,  after  the  most  careful 
preparation.  Among  experienced  legislators,  this  would  be  con- 


LIFE  OF.  CHARLES  SUMNER  273 

sidered  a  virtue,  in  a  young  member.  He  addressed  the  Con 
vention  in  favor  of  a  provision,  that  in  the  organization  of  the 
volunteer  military  companies  of  the  Commonwealth,  there 
should  be  no  distinction  on  account  of  color  or  race.  He  spoke 
again  on  the  absorbing  question  of  the  Convention,  the  repre 
sentative  system,  and  its  proper  basis.  The  latter  speech  was 
longer  than  the  limit  fixed  by  the  Convention  allowed,  but  by 
unanimous  consent,  he  was  permitted  to  continue.  He  advo 
cated  the  abolition  of  the  general  ticket  system  theretofore  al 
lowed  to  cities,  and  thought  the  members  should  be  distributed 
to  towns  according  to  the  number  of  voters,  but  where,  by  reason 
of  population,  a  town  was  entitled  to  more  than  one  member, 
the  town  should  be  divided  into  districts  so  that  no  voter  should 
be  allowed  to  vote  for  more  than  one  member.  The  Convention 
favored  and  adopted  the  abolition  of  the  general  ticket,  but 
reduced  the  representation  of  the  cities  below  their  numerical 
proportion  and  continued  the  non-representation  of  small  towns 
during  a  part  of  the  decade,  except  when  they  provided  other 
wise  themselves,  by  a  union  with  other  towns.  No  one  ad 
vocated  the  existing  system.  Though  the  views  of  Sumner  did 
not  all  prevail,  he  readily  acquiesced  in  the  work  of  the  Conven 
tion.  He  especially  favored  the  abolition  of  the  general  ticket 
system  and  regarded  this  change  as  a  distinct  improvement  on 
the  old  practice. 

Among  other  changes  incorporated  in  the  proposed  Consti 
tution,  there  was  a  limitation  of  the  judicial  term  to  ten  years, 
after  the  expiration  of  existing  terms.  It  also  proposed  the 
election  of  judges  of  probate  and  made  other  offices,  heretofore 
filled  by  appointment  of  the  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth, 
elective ;  and  it  submitted  to  the  people  a  proposition  to  forbid 
the  appropriation  of  public  money  to  the  support  of  sectarian 
schools. 

The  Convention  adjourned  on  the  first  day  of  August,  1853. 
It  remained  for  its  work  to  be  approved  by  a  vote  of  the  people. 
At  first  this  seemed  to  be  easy  of  accomplishment.  The  Free- 
Soilers  held  their  convention  and  nominated  Wilson  for  Gov 
ernor  and  there  was  hope  of  his  election,  by  a  coalition  with  the 
Democrats.  The  campaign  opened  vigorously,  Sumner  entered 
into  it  with  earnestness.  He  spoke  for  the  Constitution  and 
Free-Soilers,  to  large  audiences  at  seventeen  places — 'Spring 
field,  Lowell,  Fall  River,  Worcester,  Marshfield,  among  the  rest, 
— closing  at  Boston.  His  audiences  were  large  and  attentive, 
and  by  reason  of  the  constitutional  element  in  the  discussion,  he 
was  heard  more  than  he  had  been,  by  men  of  other  parties.  In 
this,  the  Constitutional  Convention  was  an  advantage  to  him. 


274  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNEll 

Both  in  the  Convention  and  on  the  stump  this  fall,  he  extended 
his  acquaintance  and  made  the  impression  upon  his  hearers 
that  he  was  not  only  a  reformer,  but  a  sagacious  and  practical 
man  of  affairs  and  a  scholarly  gentleman,  not  a  mere  crank,  on 
the  slavery  question,  as  he  had  been  held  up  by  the  Whigs.  His 
speech  on  the  stump  satisfied  his  hearers.  We  are  told  that  he 
usually  spoke  two  hours  and  a  half  and  that  his  audiences  con 
tinued  with  him  to  the  end. 

As  the  campaign  progressed,  however,  dangers  appeared  for 
the  success  of  the  Constitution  and  the  coalition.  Adams  who 
had  been  defeated  and  Palfrey  who  had  not  been  made  a  can 
didate,  both  came  out  against  the  Constitution ;  the  former  in 
a  speech  and  the  latter  in  a  public  letter,  which  was  reprinted 
and  sent  broadcast  over  the  State.  They  were  both  well  known 
as  Free-Soilers.  The  Whigs  had  already  declared  in  their 
platform  against  it,  and  this  unexpected  defection  encouraged 
them ;  on  the  eve  of  the  election,  Caleb  Gushing  who  had  been 
made  the  Attorney-General  in  President  Pierce's  cabinet,  also 
appeared  in  a  letter,  in  which  the  Democrats  were  given  to 
understand  that  there  must  be  no  more  of  the  coalition  with 
Free-Soilers,  that  this  heresy  must  be  trampled  out  and  that 
any  violation  of  this  edict  meant  exclusion  from  office  under 
the  new  administration.  The  Catholics  were  against  the  Con 
stitution  because  of  their  threatened  exclusion  from  a  division 
of  the  school  tax  and  the  cities  because  of  the  reduction  of  their 
representation.  This  was  altogether  more  than  the  Constitu 
tion  could  bear  and  the  coalition  went  down  with  it,  under 
more  than  five  thousand  majority,  as  against  ten  thousand  by 
which  they  had  carried  the  proposition  for  a  Convention.  The 
Whigs  elected  the  Governor  and  the  Legislature.  In  their  mad 
glee  over  the  result  they  went  so  far  as  to  open  still  wider  their 
breach  with  the  anti-slavery  men.  Little  did  they  then  think 
that  the  next  election  would  witness  their  utter  defeat,  soon  to 
be  followed  by  the  breaking  up  of  the  party  and  the  placing  of 
Wilson,  the  defeated  candidate  of  the  Free-Soilers  for  Governor, 
in  the  Senate  as  Sumner's  colleague. 

Simmer's  position  was  more  isolated  than  ever.  He  was  de 
nominated  a  Senator  without  a  party  and  he  was  called  upon  to 
resign  his  seat  because  he  was  without  support  among  the  people 
of  his  State.  His  friends  were  told  that  their  parly  was  dead 
and  that  they  themselves  were  dupes.  They  were  met  in  the 
streets  by  cold  looks  and  by  taunting  treatment.  Wilson  felt  it 
keenly,  by  reason  of  his  prominence  in  the  movement  and  to 
avoid  the  reception  he  met  with,  on  the  crowded  thoroughfares, 
he  chose  the  less  frequented  streets  to  reach  his  place  of  busi- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  275 

ness.  Boston  was  especially  intolerant  of  the  new  party  and 
showed  much  ill-feeling  towards  its  leaders.  At  the  close  of 
the  Constitutional  Convention,  at  a  dinner  given  in  commemo 
ration  of  the  embarkation  of  the  Pilgrims,  Sumner  had  given 
expression  to  his  own  feeling  of  isolation  in  the  response  to  his 
toast.  After  briefly  referring  to  the  Puritan  triumph  under 
Cromwell  and  their  subsequent  weight  of  poverty  and  exile 
and  the  still  later  influence  of  their  example  in  America,  he 
said: 

"  And  these  outcasts,  despised  in  their  own  day  by  the  proud 
and  great,  are  the  men  whom  we  have  met  in  this  goodly  num 
ber  to  celebrate, — not  for  any  victory  of  war, — not  for  any 
triumph  of  discovery,  science,  learning  or  eloquence, — not  for 
worldly  success  of  any  kind.  How  poor  are  all  these  things  by 
the  side  of  that  divine  virtue  which  amidst  the  reproach,  the 
obloquy  and  the  hardness  of  the  world  made  them  hold  fast  to 
Freedom  and  Truth !  Sir,  if  the  honors  of  this  day  are  not  a 
mockery,  if  they  do  not  expend  themselves  in  mere  self-gratula- 
tion,  if  they  are  a  sincere  homage  to  the  character  of  the  Pil 
grims, — and  I  cannot  suppose  otherwise, — then  it  is  well  for  us 
to  be  here.  Standing  on  Plymouth  Rock  at  their  great  anni 
versary,  we  cannot  fail  to  be  elevated  by  their  example.  We  see 
clearly  what  it  has  done  for  the  world,  and  what  it  has  done  for 
their  fame.  No  pusillanimous  soul  here  to-day  will  declare 
their  self-sacrifice,  their  deviation  from  received  opinions,  their 
unquenchable  thirst  for  liberty  an  error  or  illusion.  From 
gushing  multitudinous  hearts  we  now  thank  these  lowly  men 
that  they  dared  to  be  true  and  brave.  Conformity  or  compro 
mise  might,  perhaps,  have  purchased  for  them  a  profitable  peace, 
but  not  peace  of  mind ;  it  might  have  secured  place  and  power, 
but  not  repose ;  it  might  have  opened  present  shelter,  but  not  a 
home  in  history  and  in  men's  hearts  till  time  shall  be  no  more. 
All  must  confess  the  true  grandeur  of  their  example,  while  in 
vindication  of  a  cherished  principle,  they  stood  alone,  against 
the  madness  of  men,  against  the  law  of  the  land,  against  their 
king.  Better  the  despised  Pilgrim,  a  fugitive  for  freedom,  than 
the  halting  politician,  forgetful  of  principle  c  with  a  Senate  at 
his  heels'."' 

Even  this  expression,  touching  as  it  seems  now,  in  the 
light  of  his  position,  was  made  the  occasion  of  criticism. 
Nothing  an  anti-slavery  man  could  say,  then  satisfied  the  carp 
ing  apologist  of  slavery.  But  John  G.  Whittier,  always  ready 
with  encouragement  for  the  good,  saw  Sumner's  speech  differ 
ently  and  wrote  that  its  tone  and  bearing  were  unmistakable 
and  yet  unobjectionable,  though  when  he  first  read  the  toast 


276  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

assigned  to  him, — The  Senate  of  the  United  States, — he 
thought  it  a  very  unpromising  text ! 

But  events  were  fast  crowding  on  that  were  to  work  a  revolu 
tion  in  public  sentiment  even  in  conservative  Boston.  Sumner 
was  in  his  seat  at  the  opening  of  the  next  session  of  Congress. 
On  the  14th  day  of  December,  1853,  a  bill  was  introduced  in 
the  Senate  to  organize  the  Territory  of  Nebraska.  It  con 
tained  no  reference  to  slavery;  but  the  Territory  was  com 
prehended  in  that  from  which  the  Missouri  Compromise  of 
1820  forever  excluded  slavery.  It  lay  north  of  longitude  36° 
30'.  The  bill  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Territories  of 
which  Stephen  A.  Douglas  was  chairman.  On  the  4th  day 
of  January,  1854,  the  Committee  reported  this  bill  back,  but 
with  an  amendment,  declaring  that  the  States  formed  out  of 
this  Territory  should  be  admitted  into  the  Union  with  or  with 
out  slavery  as  they  should  desire.  An  amendment  was  offered 
to  this  bill  by  a  Kentucky  member,  that  the  existing  prohibition 
of  slavery  should  not  be  construed  so  as  to  apply  to  the  Terri 
tory  contemplated  by  this  act  or  any  other  Territory  of  the 
United  States,  but  that  the  citizens  of  the  several  States  or 
Territories  should  be  at  liberty  to  take  and  hold  their  slaves 
within  any  of  the  Territories  of  the  United  States  or  of  the 
States  to  be  formed  therefrom.  Sumner  thereupon  offered  an 
amendment  that  nothing  in  this  act  should  be  construed  to 
abrogate  the  Act  of  1820,  whereby  slavery  was  forever  prohib 
ited  in  that  territory.  On  January  24th,  Douglas  from  the 
Committee  submitted  a  new  bill  as  a  substitute,  whereby  the 
Territory  was  divided  into  two,  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  and  it 
was  formally  declared  that  the  prohibition  of  slavery  in  them 
was  superseded  by  the  Compromise  of  1850.  Thus  the  question, 
suggested  by  Summer's  amendment,  was  squarely  made,  whether 
the  Compromise  of  1820  was  to  be  declared  repealed  and  all  the 
territory  of  the  United  States,  comprehended  in  the  Louisiana 
Purchase,  was  to  be  opened  to  slavery. 

This  was  a  startling  proposition  presented  to  the  Free  States 
and  to  the  opponents  of  slavery.  The  compact  that  was  made 
by  the  Slave  States,  to  secure  the  admission  of  Missouri,  with 
slavery,  was  now  proposed  to  be  repudiated  at  the  very  time 
when  it  was  becoming  effective  in  favor  of  freedom,  by  reason 
of  the  rush  of  emigration  Westward.  It  had  stood  as  one  of 
the  (( Landmarks  of  Freedom  "  for  a  generation.  People  had 
come  to  regard  it  as  one  of  the  impassible  barriers  that  had  been 
set  to  slavery.  But  slavery  to  which  concession  after  concession 
had  been  made,  to  secure  these  compromises,  proposed  to  make 
a  complete  repudiation  and  having  received  the  benefits  of  the 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMMER  277 

comtract  to  repudiate  the  burdens  it  had  assumed  to  get  them. 
It  proposed  to  make  the  territory  hitherto  reserved  to  Freedom 
all  slave.  The  people  of  the  Free  States  paused  and  asked 
themselves  if  such  a  thing  could  be  true. 

Douglas  was  a  bold  and  enterprising  man.  Having  once 
committed  himself  to  the  proposition  he  pressed  it  vigorously. 
The  bill  was  introduced  in  the  Senate  on  January  23.  On  the 
next  day  when  it  had  just  been  laid  upon  the  desks  of  the 
Senators,  he  pressed  its  consideration  on  the  Senate,  and  only 
after  debate  was  it  postponed  till  January  30,  six  days,  when 
it  was  to  be  the  special  order,  till  brought  to  a  vote.  This  was 
haste.  Anti-slavery  men  felt  that  a  matter  of  such  importance 
should  be  considered  with  more  deliberation.  The  country  had 
no  opportunity  in  so  short  a  time  to  be  made  acquainted  with 
its  provisions.  But  its  advocates  did  not  wish  a  general  dis 
cussion  of  it,  believing  they  had  nothing  to  gain  by  such  a 
course:  while  its  opponents  were  determined  the  people  should 
understand  it. 

Sumner  and  Chase,  at  once  issued  an  address  to  the  coun 
try,  signed  by  themselves  and  a  few  Eepresentatives,  styling 
themselves  Independent  Democrats.  It  was  written  by  Chase 
and  set  forth,  in  strong  language,  the  danger  of  the  hour  and 
the  necessity  for  prompt  action  on  the  part  of  the  people  to 
prevent  their  Representatives  in  Congress  from  passing  the 
bill  and  thus  consummating  another  encroachment  of  slavery. 
The  address  was  circulated  largely  and  did  much  to  awaken 
the  people  to  the  importance  of  the  occasion.  But  the  country 
is  large  and  it  takes  time  to  reach  the  people  widely  scattered 
in  their  homes  and  impress  upon  them  the  necessity  for  action. 
With  inferior  mail  facilities  it  took  more  time  then  than  now. 
The  people  awoke  slowly  but  the  gravity  of  the  situation  im 
pressed  thinking  men.  It  brought  Abraham  Lincoln  from  the 
retirement  of  his  practice  as  a  country  lawyer.  As  the  debate 
proceeded  in  Congress,  the  country  became  deeply  interested. 
In  some  sections  the  ministers  by  agreement  on  a  certain  sab 
bath,  preached  a  sermon  against  it  in  their  churches.  It  was 
thus  made  a  moral  question  and  as  much  as  possible  divorced 
from  party  connections.  Only  a  short  time  before  the  country 
had  been  assured  that  the  compromise  of  1850  adjusted  the 
slavery  question  forever  and  yet  within  a  few  months  the 
South  was  presenting,  with  increased  boldness,  and  demanding 
greater  concessions  than  ever  before.  Thoughtful  people  might 
well  ask  themselves  what  all  these  compromises  were  worth 
procured  at  the  expense  of  so  much  trouble  and  contention. 

In  opening  the  debate,  Douglas  referred  in  severe  terms  to  the 


278  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

address  that  had  been  issued  by  the  "  Independent  Democrats  " 
and  directed  much  of  his  speech,  coarse  in  its  terms,  to  Sumner 
and  Chase,  who  had  been  the  only  members  of  the  Senate  to 
sign  it.  Douglas  was  recognized  as  a  candidate  for  the  Presi 
dency  and  his  conduct  was  supposed  to  be  influenced  by  his 
effort  to  get  the  votes  of  the  South.  As  soon  as  he  closed,  Chase 
was  on  his  feet  to  reply  to  the  personal  references  to  himself. 
He  was  followed  by  Sumner  who  spoke  briefly  only  admitting 
his  responsibility  for  the  address,  calling  attention  to  the  im 
portance  of  the  measure  and  protesting  against  the  "  galloping 
speed  "  with  which  it  was  being  pressed  for  passage,  before  the 
people  could  be  heard.  But  both  Sumner  and  Chase  reserved 
their  real  speech  on  the  question  till  a  later  time.  Thus  opened 
the  great  Nebraska  Debate  which  was  to  occupy  the  attention 
of  the  country  for  months  and  whose  ultimate  issue  was  to  be 
the  Civil  War. 

Three  weeks  later,  Sumner  spoke  again  and  fully  on  the  ques 
tion.  At  the  outset,  in  his  speech,  he  declined  to  make  any 
answer  to  the  epithets  Douglas  had  used  towards  him  and  Chase. 
The  issue  contained  in  the  bill  he  thought  too  great  to  be 
dwarfed  by  any  personal  consideration.  Nor  would  he  take 
time  to  argue  the  question  whether  the  prohibition  in  the  law 
of  1820,  had  been  repealed  by  the  law  of  1850.  He  merely 
suggested  that  the  compromise  of  1850  did  not  pretend  in 
terms  to  touch  this  prohibition,  that  the  Territories  it  re 
lated  to,  Utah  and  New  Mexico,  were  not  to  be  affected  during 
their  existence  as  Territories,  but  when  they  came  to  be  admit 
ted  as  States ;  that  during  all  the  discussion  of  the  act  of  1850 
no  one  mentioned  it  as  affecting  this  Territory ;  and  it  expressly 
said  it  was  not  to  change  the  resolution  annexing  Texas,  where 
in  the  prohibition  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  was  expressly 
reaffirmed. 

But  Sumner  made  two  points  in  his  speech  explicitly  and  he 
enforced  them  with  all  his  power;  First,  This  bill  was  an  in 
fraction  of  solemn  obligations  assumed  beyond  recall  by  the 
South  on  the  admission  of  Missouri  as  a  slave  State ;  Second  it 
was  an  unjustifiable  departure  from  the  original  Anti-slave 
policy  of  our  fathers. 

In  establishing  his  first  proposition,  he  went  at  length  into 
the  history  of  the  Compromise  of  1820  to  show  that  it  was  dis 
tinctly  a  measure  originating  with  the  Slave  States  and  voted 
for  by  their  Eepresentatives,  in  both  Houses  to  secure  what 
they  sought,  the  admission  of  Missouri  as  a  slave  State.  They 
plighted  their  solemn  faith  that  the  covenant  then  made  by 
them  should  be  faithfully  kept.  On  the  part  of  the  North,  it 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  279 

had  been;  while  the  South  now  refused  to  execute  it.  He 
scouted  the  idea  that  it  was  not  a  binding  contract.  He  said  a 
subtile  German  had  declared  that  he  could  find  heresies  in  the 
Lord's  Prayer  and  he  believed  it  was  only  in  this  spirit  that  any 
flaw  could  be  found  in  the  obligations  of  this  compact. 

In  support  of  his  second  proposition,  he  followed  the  same 
course  of  reasoning  that  he  had  in  his  speech  on  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law,  but  pursued  it  with  less  particularity  than  before. 
He  insisted  that  there  had  been  three  stages  in  our  National 
development,  first,  when  the  policy  of  the  Government  had  been 
all  for  Freedom ;  second,  when  only  half  so ;  third,  when  all 
was  grasped  by  Slavery,  that  as  late  as  1820,  John  W.  Taylor  a 
Representative  from  New  York,  who  openly  advocated  the  pro 
hibition  of  slavery  in  the  Territories  and  its  restriction  in  Mis 
souri  was  elected  Speaker  of  the  House,  while  such  a  man  now 
was  disqualified  for  a  National  office.  He  insisted  that  only  a 
man  of  known  pliancy  to  slavery,  could  now  be  elected  to  such 
a  place. 

With  Douglas  in  his  mind  as  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency, 
he  said:  "The  race  of  men,  ' white  slaves  of  the  North,'  de 
scribed  and  despised  by  a  Southern  Statesman,  is  not  yet 
extinct  there.  It  is  one  of  the  melancholy  tokens  of  the  power 
of  slavery,  under  our  political  system  and  especially  through 
the  operations  of  the  National  Government,  that  it  loosens  and 
destroys  the  character  of  Northern  men,  exerting  its  subtile  in 
fluences  even  at  a  distance, — like  the  black  magnetic  mountain 
in  the  Arabian  story,  under  whose  irresistible  attraction,  the 
iron  bolts  which  held  together  the  strong  timbers  of  the  stately 
ship,  floating  securely  on  the  distant  wave,  were  drawn  out 
till  the  whole  fell  apart,  and  became  a  disjointed  wreck.  Alas ; 
too  often  those  principles  which  give  consistency,  individuality, 
and  form  to  the  Northern  character,  which  render  it  staunch, 
strong  and  seaworthy,  which  bind  it  together  as  with  iron,  are 
sucked  out,  one  by  one,  like  the  bolts  of  the  ill-fated  vessel, 
and  from  the  miserable  loosened  fragments  is  formed  that 
human  anomaly,  a  Northern  man  with  Southern  principles, 
Sir,  no  such  man  can  speak  for  the  North/' 

The  term  of  Sumner's  colleague,  John  Davis,  had  expired  and 
Edward  Everett  had  been  elected  to  his  place.  He  came  to  the 
Senate  with  a  wide  reputation,  for  scholarship  and  graceful 
oratory.  As  President  of  Harvard  College,  where  Sumner's 
affections  were  deeply  rooted,  he  and  Everett  had  been  brought 
much  into  contact  and  had  enjoyed  friendly  relations.  Bu£ 
there  was  a  wide  difference  between  them.  Sumner  represented 
the  extreme  anti-slavery  men  of  the  States,  while  Everett  was 


280  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  champion  of  the  aristocratic,  conservative  and  commercial 
Whigs.  He  was  the  friend  and  editor  and  biographer  of  Daniel 
Webster.  He  was  not  of  an  aggressive  temperament.  He  had 
been  educated  for  the  ministry  and  deprecated  controversy ; 
was  a  man  before  whom  Disunion  could  be  held  up  with  all 
its  terrors  and  he,  like  Douglas,  had  hopes  of  the  Presidency. 
Sumner  and  Everett  probably  came  together,  with  the  deter 
mination  unexpressed,  that  there  should  be  no  break  between 
them  and  yet  no  intimacy.  At  the  beginning  of  the  session 
and  of  his  term,  Everett  had  objected,  in  the  Whig  caucus,  to 
Sumner  receiving  a  place  on  any  committee  of  the  Senate,  say 
ing  that,  while  he  wished  to  continue  his  friendly  relations  with 
him,  he  was  unwilling  to  see  any  action  that  would  recognize 
him  as  a  Whig.  Sumner  was  accordingly  excluded,  though 
Seward  and  Chase  were  both  given  places. 

After  some  effort  to  discover  the  feeling  of  his  constituents 
as  to  the  Nebraska  Bill,  Everett  had  opposed  it  by  a  speech  in 
the  Senate,  not  vigorously  but  in  well-turned  phrase.  He  reit 
erated  the  same  argument  that  Webster  had  made  on  the  Com 
promise  of  1850,  as  to  California.  He  could  not  see  that  the 
legislation  was  vital  to  Nebraska,  for,  whatever  the  fate  of  the 
bill,  he  thought  the  climatic  and  physical  conditions  were  such 
as  to  forever  exclude  slavery  from  this  Territory. 

Sumner  was  prepared  for  this  argument.  In  answering  him 
he  said  he  felt  obliged  kindly  but  most  strenuously  to  dissent 
from  this  view.  There  was  Missouri,  he  said,  with  Illinois  on 
the  east  and  Nebraska  on  the  west,  all  covering  nearly  the  same 
spaces  of  latitude,  and  resembling  each  other  in  soil,  climate 
and  natural  production.  But  mark  the  contrast !  By  the  ordi 
nance  of  the  North  West  Territory  Illinois  became  a  free  state, 
while  Missouri  had  more  than  eighty-seven  thousand  slaves. 
Climatic  and  physical  conditions  had  not  determined  the  dif 
ference,  but  the  laws  of  man;  and  the  simple  question  was 
whether  -Nebraska  should  be  preserved  in  the  condition  of  Illi 
nois  or  surrendered  to  that  of  Missouri. 

Sumner  felt  that  the  passage  of  this  bill  was  meant  to  open  to 
slavery  not  merely  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  but  all  the  Territories 
comprised  within  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  in  other  words,  all  be 
tween  the  British  possessions  on  the  North  and  the  Eocky  Moun 
tains  on  the  west.  In  this  view  it  concerned  an  immense  region 
larger  than  the  original  Thirteen  States,  vying  in  extent  with 
all  the  Free  States,  "stretching  over  prairie,  field  and  forest, 
interlaced  by  silver  streams,  skirted  by  protecting  mountains, 
and  constituting  the  heart  of  the  North  American  continent, 
only  a  little  smaller  than  the  three  great  European  countries 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  281 

combined, — Italy,  Spain  and  France — each  of  which  in  succes 
sion  had  dominated  over  the  globe."  It  was  for  such  a  territory, 
he  said,  they  were  legislating  and  establishing  rules  of  polity 
which  would  determine  its  future  character.  According  to  the 
existing  law  this  territory  was  guarded  against  slavery  by  the 
law  of  1820,  enacted  preparatory  to  the  admission  of  Missouri 
as  a  State.  It  was  now  proposed  to  set  aside  this  prohibition. 

This  sweeping  aspect  of  the  bill  impressed  the  people  of  the 
North.  True  the  bill  only  applied  to  Kansas  and  Nebraska  in 
terms,  but  if  the  prohibition  of  1820,  applying  to  them,  was 
destroyed,  by  the  act  of  1850,  it  must  be  destroyed  as  to  every 
acre  of  land  which  the  law  of  1820  protected.  So  that  notwith 
standing  the  haste  with  which  Douglas  had  pressed  its  passage, 
the  bill  continued  before  Congress,  with  little  interruption,  for 
six  months.  Eemonstrances  against  it  came  from  various 
sources  and  were  presented  to  both  Houses.  The  clergy 
preached  against  it  and  held  meetings  to  devise  means  to  defeat 
it  Those  of  New  England  sent  a  memorial  signed  by  more 
than  three  thousand  ministers.  It  was  presented  to  the  Senate 
by  Edward  Everett,  Sumner's  colleague.  It  awakened  some 
feeling, — Douglas  and  Mason  especially  taking  exception  to 
this  interference  of  the  ministry  with  political  affairs.  They 
criticised  the  form  of  the  remonstrance,  which  commenced  with 
the  words,  "In  the  name  of  Almighty  God  and  in  His  pres 
ence." 

When  the  bill  came  up  for  final  passage  in  the  Senate  on  the 
25th  day  of  May,  Everett  had  tendered  his  resignation  as  Sena 
tor  and  was  detained  from  the  session  by  sickness.  In  his 
absence,  late  at  night,  it  fell  to  Sumner's  lot  to  present 
separate,  remonstrances  from  some  citizens  of  New  York, 
from  the  Society  of  Friends,  from  the  Baptists  of  Mich 
igan  and  Indiana  and  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  remon 
strances  from  clergymen  of  different  denominations  in  New 
England.  He  had  already  done  all  he  could  to  prevent  the  pas 
sage  of  the  bill,  had  opposed  it  from  the  beginning,  had  ap 
pealed  to  his  colleagues,  reasoned  with  them,  spoken  against  it, 
appealed  to  the  people  to  exert  their  influence  with  their  Rep 
resentatives  against  it.  But  with  all  his  efforts,  its  passage  now 
seemed  certain.  Standing  almost  alone,  with  the  darkness  of 
night  without  and  the  consummation  of  this  wrong  before  him, 
knowing  that  nothing  he  could  say  or  do  would  avert  it,  his 
words  had  a  sad  and  almost  prophetic  meaning: 

"  It  is  now  midnight/'  he  said.  "  At  this  late  hour  of  a  ses 
sion  drawn  out  to  unaccustomed  length,  I  shall  not  fatigue 
the  Senate  by  argument.  There  is  a  time  for  all  things  and 


282  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  time  for  argument  has  passed.  The  determination  of  the 
majority  is  fixed;  but  it  is  not  more  fixed  than  mine.  The 
bill,  which  they  sustain,  I  oppose.  On  a  former  occasion  I  met 
it  by  argument  which  though  often  attacked  in  debate,  still 
stands  unanswered  and  unanswerable.  At  the  present  time  I 
am  admonished  that  I  must  be  content  with  a  few  words  of 
earnest  protest  against  the  consummation  of  a  great  wrong. 
Duty  to  myself  and  also  to  the  honored  Commonwealth  of 
which  I  find  myself  the  sole  representative  in  this  immediate 
exigency,  will  not  allow  me  to  do  less. 

"But  I  have  a  special  duty  which  I  would  not  omit.  Here 
on  my  desk  are  remonstrances  against  the  passage  of  this  bill, 
some  placed  in  my  hands  since  the  commencement  of  the  debate 
to-day,  and  I  desire  that  these  voices  direct  from  the  people 
should  be  heard.  With  the  permission  of  the  Senate  I  will  offer 
them  now."  *  *  * 

"  With  pleasure  and  pride  I  now  do  this  service  and  at  this 
last  stage,  interpose  the  sanctity  of  the  pulpits  of  New  England 
to  arrest  an  alarming  outrage,  believing  that  the  remonstrants 
from  their  eminent  character  and  influence  as  representatives 
of  the  intelligence  and  conscience  of  the  country,  are  peculiarly 
entitled  to  be  heard, — and  further,  believing  that  their  remon 
strances  while  respectful  in  form,  embody  just  conclusions 
both  of  opinion  and  fact.  Like  them,  Sir,  1  do  not  hesitate  to 
protest  against  the  bill  yet  pending  before  the  Senate  as  a 
great  moral  wrong,  as  a  breach  of  public  faith,  as  a  measure 
full  of  danger  to  the  peace,  and  even  existence  of  our  Union. 
And,  Sir,  believing  in  God  as  I  profoundly  do,  I  cannot  doubt 
that  the  opening  of  an  immense  region,  to  so  great  an  enormity 
as  slavery,  is  calculated  to  draw  down  upon  our  country  His 
righteous  judgments." 

He  then  referred  to  the  criticism  of  the  clergymen  for  taking 
part  in  the  controversy  and  of  the  wording  of  their  remon 
strance.  He  reminded  Senators  that  there  was  a  time  when 
New  England  was  governed  more  by  the  prayers  of  the  clergy 
men  than  by  the  acts  of  the  Legislature  and  that  in  remon 
strating  "  in  the  name  of  Almighty  God,"  they  only  obeyed  the 
scriptural  injunction,  "  do  all  in  the  name  of  the  Lord/' 

"  Si/r"  he  continued,  "  the  bill  you  are  about  to  pass  is  at 
once  the  worst  and  best  upon  which  Congress  ever  acted.  *  *  * 

"  It  is  the  worst  bill  inasmuch  as  it  is  a  present  victory  of 
Slavery.  In  a  Christian  land  and  in  an  age  of  civilization,  a 
time-honored  statute  of  Freedom  is  struck  down,  opening  the 
way  to  all  the  countless  woes  and  wrongs  of  human  bondage. 
Among  the  crimes  of  history,  another  is  soon  to  be  recorded 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  283 

which  no  tears  can  blot  out  and  which  in  better  days  will  be 
read  with  universal  shame.  *  *  * 

"  There  is  another  side  to  which  I  gladly  turn.  Sir,  it  is  the 
best  bill  on  which  Congress  ever  acted;  for  it  annuls  all  past 
compromises  with  Slavery  and  makes  any  future  compromises 
impossible.  Thus  it  puts  Freedom  and  Slavery  face  to  face  and 
bids  them  grapple.  Who  can  doubt  the  result?  It  opens  wide 
the  door  of  the  future,  when  at  last,  there  will  really  be  a 
North,  and  the  Slave-Power  will  be  broken, — when  this 
wretched  Despotism  will  cease  to  dominate  over  our  Govern 
ment,  no  longer  impressing  itself  upon  everything  at  home  and 
abroad, — when  the  National  Government  will  be  divorced  in 
every  way  from  Slavery,  and  according  to  the  true  intention  of 
our  fathers,  Freedom  will  be  established  by  Congress  every 
where,  at  least  beyond  the  local  limits  of  the  States.  *  *  * 

"  Sorrowfully  I  bend  before  the  wrong  you  commit.  Joy 
fully  I  welcome  the  promises  of  the  future." 

As  Sumner  had  predicted,  the  bill  passed  by  a  large  majority 
in  each  House.  He  had  solemnly  warned  them :  "  Not  in  this 
way  can  peace  come.  In  passing  such  a  bill  as  is  now  threat 
ened,  you  scatter  from  this  dark  midnight  hour,  no  seeds  of 
harmony  and  good-will,  but  broad  cast  through  the  land, 
dragon's  teeth  which  haply  may  not  spring  up  in  direful  crops 
of  armed  men,  yet,  I  am  assured  will  fructify  in  civil  strife 
and  feud." 

This  prediction  seemed  to  be  fulfilled  sooner  than  he  ex 
pected.  On  May  twenty-fourth,  Anthony  Burns,  a  negro  was 
seized  in  Boston  as  a  fugitive  slave  on  the  claim  of  a  citizen' 
of  Virginia  and  was  confined  by  the  Marshal  in  one  of  the 
rooms  of  the  Court  House.  On  the  evening  of  May  twenty- 
sixth,  after  a  meeting  of  Abolitionists  in  Faneuil  Hall,  a 
mob  attacked  the  guards  and  one  of  them,  James  Batchelder, 
was  killed.  The  affair  created  a  great  sensation  in  Washington, 
where  the  impression  made  by  Sumner's  speech  on  the  public 
mind  wrought  up  over  the  consideration  of  the  bill,  was  still 
fresh.  By  some  of  the  frenzied  defenders  of  Slavery,  the 
tragedy  in  Boston  was  attributed  to  the  influence  of  Sumner's 
speech  upon  his  constituents.  A  moment's  thought  would  have 
shown  that  there  could  be  no  connection  between  the  two 
events;  for  the  speech  was  made  so  late  that  the  report  of  it 
could  not  have  reached  Boston,  by  the  means  of  communica 
tion  they  then  had. 

But  Slavery  was  unreasonable.  It  was  entering  upon  that 
career  of  madness  which  was  to  end  in  its  destruction.  Feeling 
was  running  high.  Threats  of  violence  and  lynching  were 


284          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

freely  made  against  Sunnier  and  the  editors  of  some  of  the 
city  papers  were  evidently  not  caring  if  this  result  did  follow. 
They  held  him  up  as  an  example  of  the  mercy  of  the  slave 
holders  who  permitted  him  to  go  unharmed  on  the  streets  of 
Washington,  while  by  his  speeches  in  the  Senate,  he  incited 
mobs  to  riot  and  murder,  if  a  citizen  of  the  South  went  to 
Boston  to  reclaim  his  property.  They  told  him  if  legal  rights 
could  only  be  secured  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet  in  Boston, 
he  would  have  to  walk  more  circumspectly  in  Washington. 
The  suggestion  was  made  that  the  feeling  against  him  and 
"his  infamous  gang  might  be  allowed  to  descend  to  personal 
violence."  He  was  insulted  and  threatened  in  the  restaurant 
where  he  took  his  meals.  A  conspiracy  was  proposed  in 
Alexandria  to  seize  him  as  a  hostage  for  the  return  of  the 
slave  Burns,  still  in  Boston,  to  inflict  personal  violence  upon 
him,  to  put  a  bullet  through  his  head;  and  he  was  warned 
to  leave  Washington.  But  Sumner  disregarded  them.  If 
harm  came  to  him,  he  quietly  said  to  solicitous  friends,  it 
would  find  him  at  his  post. 

Dispatches  from  Washington  to  the  New  York  Times  and 
other  papers  communicated  to  friends  his  danger.  They  were 
apprehensive  lest  the  feeling  they  knew  the  death  of  Batchelder 
created,  would  be  visited  on  him.  Joseph  R.  Hawley,  then  a 
young  editor  of  Hartford,  since  a  General  in  the  war  of  the 
Rebellion  and  a  Governor  and  IT.  S.  Senator  of  Connecticut, 
offered  to  go  on  to  Washington  and  be  at  hand  armed  and  ready 
to  protect  him,  if  violence  should  be  offered.  But  Sumner 
declined. 

A  month  later  a  bill  was  introduced  in  the  Senate  to  pension 
the  widow  of  Batchelder.  Sumner  and  Seward  submitted  a 
minority  report  against  it,  which  was  prepared  by  Sumner. 
Batchelder  was  an  ordinary  truckman  who  had  three  times 
volunteered  his  services  to  assist  the  Marshal  in  executing  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law.  The  minority  report  insisted  that  there 
was  no  precedent  for  a  pension  except  for  service  in  the  army 
or  navy,  in  neither  of  which  he  was,  and  that  none  should  be 
granted  to  persons  injured  in  the  execution  of  this  law.  But 
the  bill  carried. 

One  of  the  exciting  battles  in  the  anti-slavery  war  was  ended 
with  the  vote  on  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill.  Apparently  it 
had  been  fought  to  no  purpose.  Slavery,  as  usual,  had  been 
successful.  True  there  had  been  an  increase  in  the  number 
of  anti-slavery  votes,  both  in  the  House  and  Senate,  but  what 
did  Slavery  care;  she  had  never  counted  her  votes  the  same, 
from  year  to  year.  The  result  in  this  respect  was  not  unusual. 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  285 

Nor  was  it  unusual  that  she  had  to  fight  for  her  victory.  She 
had  been  doing  this  for  years;  and  she  had  fought  no  harder 
now  than  for  the  Compromise  of  1850.  And  she  had  become  so 
strong  that  she  could  be  insulting  to  her  opponents  and  yet 
successful.  She  had  reached  her  highest  power  in  extent 
of  territory. 

And  yet,  with  all  this,  she  was  weaker  than  she  had  been  for 
many  years.  The  anti-slavery  men  had  made  a  distinct  ad 
vance,  not  in  a  material  way,  but  in  the  hold  they  had  gained 
on  the  popular  mind.  At  last  conservative  and  thinking  men 
were  becoming  convinced  that  the  slave  power  must  be  con 
trolled.  The  mercantile  classes  of  Boston  were  accepting  this 
view.  As  evidence  of  it,  a  petition  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law,  placed  in  the  Merchants  Exchange,  in  Boston,  had 
received  nearly  three  thousand  signatures,  many  of  them  of 
persons  who  had  been  vigorously  opposing  Sumner's  work. 
And  Massachusetts  had  sent  to  the  Senate,  to  fill  the  place  of 
Edward  Everett,  who  had  resigned,  Julius  Rockwell;  and  for 
the  first  time  Sumner  had  a  colleague  who  would  vote  with  him. 
There  were  favorable  signs  also  in  other  States.  The  admin 
istration  party  had  been  defeated  in  the  President's  own  State, 
New  Hampshire.  Connecticut  had  sent  a  Free-Soiler  to  the 
U.  S.  Senate.  Anti-slavery  men  had  grown  largely  in  numbers 
in  the  North.  So  the  fight  that  Sumner  and  Chase  had  led  in 
defence  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  was  not  in  vain. 

The  feeling  against  slavery  having  been  once  aroused  was  not 
so  easily  allayed.  When  the  Merchants  Exchange  petition 
was  brought  from  Boston,  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law,  it  was  presented  in  the  Senate  by  Rockwell  and,  after 
reading  it,  with  a  few  remarks,  he  moved  that  it  be  referred  to 
the  Judiciary  Committee.  A  controversy  at  once  arose  which 
continued  for  some  days.  Here  was  another  evidence  of  the 
distinct  advance  of  anti-slavery  sentiment  in  Congress.  In 
the  Senate  such  petitions-  haid  often  been  treated  uncere 
moniously;  frequently,  by  motion,  without  reading  and  with 
out  reference  to  any  committee,  being  laid  upon  the  table, 
never  to  be  heard  of  again.  With  all  the  feeling  that  this  one 
provoked,  no  attempt  was  made  to  stifle  it  now. 

In  the  House,  there  had  been  in  force  what  was  known  as 
the  "  Gag  Rule."  It  provided  that  all  petitions  on  the  subject 
of  slavery  should  be  referred  to  the  appropriate  committees 
without  reading.  Year  after  year,  John  Quincy  Adams  had 
moved  the  repeal  of  this  rule  and  had  insisted  on  debating 
the  question.  Year  after  year  he  had  been  defeated.  But 
defeat  had  no  terrors  for  him,  when  he  believed  he  was  right. 


286  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

If  the  rule  was  continued  the  next  year  he  renewed  the  fight 
to  repeal  it;  and  it  was  at  last  repealed.  The  friends  of  Free 
dom  could  hail  these  things  as  the  light  of  returning  day. 

After  the  petition  presented  by  Rockwell  had  been  read 
and  the  motion  made  to  refer  it  to  the  Judiciary  Committee, 
Jones  of  Tennessee  took  the  floor.  The  petition  showed  that 
not  only  had  the  apprehension  of  Burns  been  resisted,  with 
fatal  results,  but  that  there  had  been  no  diminution  of  the 
popular  feeling  against  the  law  and  that  public  sentiment  was 
becoming  stronger  than  ever  in  favor  of  its  repeal  and  was 
demanding  it  as  essential  to  the  public  peace  in  the  North. 
Jones  insisted  that  such  petitions  and  the  speeches  that  sup 
ported  them  were  inciting  people  over  the  country  to  riots  and 
the  shedding  of  innocent  blood,  while  the  real  authors  of  the 
trouble  were  keeping  themselves  at  a  safe  distance.  This 
brought  Rockwell  to  his  feet  in  defence  of  the  petition.  He 
was  followed  by  Jones  again,  and  Broadhead  of  Pennsylvania. 
Sumner  and  Massachusetts  were  the  especial  objects  of  their 
invective.  Sumner's  midnight  speech,  at  the  close  of  the  debate 
on  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill  still  angered  them.  They  in 
sisted  that  such  petitions  and  speeches  would  soon  end  in  the 
disruption  of  the  Union,  and  that  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law  would  have  the  same  tendency. 

Sumner  promptly  replied.  He  dismissed  the  claim  that  the 
repeal  of  this  law  would  destroy,  the  Union,  by  saying  that  if 
the  Union  depended  for  its  existence  on  any  such  poor  pretext 
it  ought  to  continue  no  longer.  He  admitted  that  many  of 
the  signers  of  this  petition  were  supporters  of  the  Compromise 
of  1850;  and  he  reminded  Senators  that  the  change  as  shown 
was  only  typical  of  the  change  in  the  community.  Once  the 
upholders  of  the  law,  they  now,  after  seeing  its  workings  de 
manded  its  repeal.  Representatives  of  the  conservative, 
mercantile  classes  had  placed  themselves  in  the  front  of  this 
movement.  So  far  as  the  speakers  had  arraigned  him  per 
sonally  he  said  he  did  not  care  to  speak.  He  had  always  been 
opposed  to  this  law  openly  and  sincerely  and  he  was  opposed  to 
it  still  and  he  could  only  repeat  what  he  had  often  said  in 
giving  his  reasons  for  its  repeal.  But  these  were  considerations 
personal  to  himself.  For  Massachusetts  who  had  been  attacked 
with  him  he  did  not  feel  the  same  indifference.  He  referred 
briefly  to  her  record  in  the  Revolutionary  War  and  reminded 
them  that  near  this  very  Court  House,  where  Burns  was  con 
fined,  the  first  blood  had  been  spilt  in  the  conflict  for  Indepen 
dence  and  that  among  those  early  victims  was  one  of  the  de 
spised  race.  He  insisted  that  the  Senate  receive  the  petition 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  287 

and  he  warned  them  that  there  was  a  plant  that  was  said  to 
grow  when  trodden  upon.  By  denying  the  right  of  petition, 
they  provoked  the  very  spirit  they  would  repress. 

Sumner's  speech  was  followed  by  a  debate,  seldom  equalled 
in  anger  and  excitement.  Butler  of  South  Carolina,  Mason  of 
Virginia,  Clay  of  Alabama,  Mallory,  Dixon  and  Petit,  the  most 
extreme  apologists  of  slavery,  all  took  part.  They  were 
especially  venomous  towards  Sumner  who  thus  far,  while  he 
had  not  spared  slavery,  had  declined  to  exchange  personalities 
with  its  advocates.  They  probably  thought  they  could  attack 
him  with  impunity  and  bully  him  into  silence.  All  sorts  of 
epithets  were  applied  to  his  speech. 

Butler  called  it  a  "  species  of  rhetoric  intended  to  feed  the 
fires  of  fanaticism  in  his  own  State " ;  "a  fourth  of  July 
oration  ",  "  vapid  rhetoric  "  and  added :  "  If  sectional  agitation 
is  to  be  fed,  by  such  sentiments,  such  displays  and  such  things 
as  come  from  the  honorable  gentleman  near  me,  I  say  we  ought 
not  to  be  in  a  common  confederacy,  and  we  should  be  better 
off  without  it." 

He  admitted  that  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves  had  perhaps 
better  have  been  left  to  the  State  than  to  the  United '  States 
officers.  But  he  doubted  whether,  if  it  had  been  left  to  the 
States,  they  would  have  returned  the  fugitives.  And  he  turned 
to  Rockwell  and  asked  if  it  were  so  left,  after  trial  by  jury  or 
other  proper  mode,  Massachusetts  would  return  a  fugitive. 
Rockwell  made  no  answer.  He  thereupon  turned  to  Sumner 
and  with  a  good  deal  of  impetuosity,  demanded :  "  Will  this 
honorable  Senator  tell  me  that  he  will  do  it  ? "  To  which 
Sumner  replied:  "Does  the  honorable  Senator  ask  me  if  I 
would  personally  join  in  sending  a  fellow  man  into  bondage? 
Is  thy  servant  a  dog  that  he  should  do  this  thing  ?  "  The  an 
swer  angered  Butler  and  he  retorted :  <(  You  stand  in  my 
presence  a  co-equal  Senator  and  tell  me  that  it  is  a  dog's  office 
to  execute  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States."  To  which 
Sumner  replied :  "  I  recognize  no  such  obligation,"  meaning 
that  he  felt  under  no  obligation  to  assist  in  the  return  of  a 
fugitive  slave.  But  the  Southerners  insisted  on  construing 
what  he  had  said,  as  meaning  that  he,  a  Senator  under  oath  to 
obey  the  Constitution,  recognized  no  obligation  to  obey  it.  At 
best  with  his  words  capable  of  the  construction  he  gave  them 
and  Sumner  so  explaining  them,  their  conduct  in  persistently 
misinterpreting  them  was  mere  pettifogging.  This  incident 
gave  the  personal  turn  to  the  debate. 

Mason  followed  Butler,  declaring  that  "the  dignity  of  the 
American  Senate  had  been  rudely,  wantonly,  grossly  assailed 


288  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

by  a  Senator  from  Massachusetts/'  denouncing  Sumner  for 
having  had  the  hardihood  to  call  "  a  gentleman  from  Virginia," 
because  he  had  gone  to  Boston  to  recover  his  property,  "  a  slave 
hunter "  and  bragged  that  the  law  had  clone  its  office  in 
Boston  and  this  too  in  the  presence  of  a  mob,  incited  by  Sum 
ner  and  his  associates,  who  sat  in  the  Senate  and  kept  them 
selves  aloof  from  danger,  while  they  excited  others  to  treason 
and  deserved  for  themselves  a  traitor's  doom.  Then  turning  to 
Sumner,  he  broke  out :  "  Why,  Sir,  am  I  speaking  of  a  fanatic, 
one  whose  reason  is  dethroned  ?  Can  such  a  one  expect  to  make 
impressions  upon  the  American  people,  from  his  vapid,  vulgar 
declamation  here,  accompanied  by  his  declarations  that  he 
would  violate  his  oath  now  recently  taken  ?  " 

These  gentlemen  who  were  ringing  the  changes  on  the  viola 
tion  of  oaths  were  soon  to  be  conspicuous  in  Rebellion  against 
the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  country,  they  had  sworn  to 
support. 

They  were  followed  in  the  debate  by  Petit  of  Indiana,  who 
consumed  the  balance  of  the  day  arguing  that  the  view  taken 
by  the  Abolitionists  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  "  made 
it  a  self  evident  lie,"  etc.,  and  illustrated  his  argument  to 
prove  that  all  men  could  not  be  equal,  by  saying  that  Sumner 
was  no  more  the  equal  of  Webster  than  "the  jackal  was  the 
equal  of  the  lion  or  the  buzzard  the  equal  of  the  eagle."  The 
President  of  the  Senate  twice  interposed,  to  call  him  to  order. 
Before  he  finished  his  speech  the  Senate  adjourned  for  the  day 
and  the  consideration  of  the  question  went  over  till  June 
twenty-eighth,  the  intervening  day  being  occupied  with  other 
business.  Petit  then  concluded,  affecting  to  believe  that  Sum 
ner  had  declared  he  did  not  regard  the  sanctity  of  his  oath. 

When  Petit  closed  a  motion  was  made  to  lay  on  the  table,  but 
Sumner  claimed  the  privilege  of  answering  the  assaults  that  had 
been  made  upon  him.  Other  Senators  also  opposed  these  efforts 
to  stifle  the  debate  and  the  motion  was  lost.  Mallory  of  Florida 
and  Clay  of  Alabama  then  both  spoke  in  the  same  vein,  gibing 
at  Sumner  as  holding  himself  irresponsible  to  the  obligations  of 
either  law  or  honor,  referring  to  him  as  a  "  miscreant,"  or  "  a 
serpent "  who  ought  to  be  "  robbed  of  his  fangs." 

When  Sumner  gained  the  floor  he  declined  to  bandy  per 
sonalities.  He  did  not  mention  them  except  to  suggest  that 
for  the  honor  of  the  Senate,  such  exhibitions  should  not  occur. 
But  he  said  he  was  reminded  by  them,  as  he  was  sure  other 
Senators  were,  of  the  remark  of  Jefferson,  that  a  man  must  be 
a  prodigy,  who  could  retain  his  manners  and  morals  undepraved 
by  the  sight  of  the  commerce  between  master  and  slave.  While 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  289 

these  Senators  were  speaking  he  was  sure  (<  the  Senate  chamber 
must  have  seemed  to  them  a  plantation  well  stocked  with  slaves, 
over  which  the  lash  and  the  overseer  had  full  swing."  He 
replied  to  Mason's  complaint  of  his  calling  the  master  of 
Burns  "  a  slave  hunter/'  by  saying  that  a  blush  was  the  sign  of 
virtue  and  he  was  glad  to  see  one,  which  even  his  plantation 
manners  could  not  conceal,  mantling  the  cheek  of  the  honor 
able  Senator. 

Sumner  objected  to  the  comparison  Senators  made  of  the 
South  with  the  North,  in  the  Revolution,  and  the  claim  they 
made  that  Independence  had  been  won  by  the  Southern  States. 
He  insisted  this  was  not  the  first  time  they  had  made  such  com 
parisons.  Butler  at  this  point  arose  and  said  he  had  never  done 
such  a  thing  or  attempted  it,  that  he  thought  such  talk  in  bad 
taste.  But  Sumner,  begging  his  pardon,  insisted  that  he  had 
profusely  dealt  in  such  comparisons  and  referred  him  to  an 
instance  of  it.  Butler  admitted  that  he  had  made  the  statement 
and  undertook  to  explain  it.  Sumner  proceeded  to  show  that 
of  the  Continental  troops  in  the  Revolution,  the  North  had  con 
tributed  172,465,  but  the  South  only  59,336,  in  other  words  3 
to  1 ;  while  of  militia  the  ratio  was  4  to  1  and  that  this  disparity 
was  caused  by  slavery ;  it  having  been  necessary  for  the  citizens 
of  the  South  to  remain  at  home,  to  prevent  uprisings  among 
the  negroes;  that  Massachusetts  alone  had  contributed  83,062 
troops,  or  more  than  all  the  South  together,  and  thirteen  times 
more  than  South  Carolina. 

Sumner  had  grown  tired  of  the  too  boastful  spirit  of  the 
South  towards  the  North.  Parting  with  Butler,  he  said :  "  I 
had  almost  forgotten  his  associate-leader  in  the  wanton  personal 
assault  upon  me  in  this  long  debate, — I  mean  the  veteran 
Senator  from  Virginia  (Mason)  who  is  now  directly  in  my  eye. 
With  imperious  look,  and  in  the  style  of  Sir  Forcible  Feeble, 
that  Senator  undertakes  to  call  in  question  my  statement,  that 
the  Fugitive' Slave  Act  denies  the  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus;  and 
in  doing  this,  he  assumes  a  superiority  for  himself,  which,  per 
mit  me  to  tell  him  now  in  this  presence,  nothing  in  him  can  war 
rant.  Sir,  I  claim  little  for  myself ;  but  I  shrink  in  no  respect 
from  any  comparison  with  the  Senator,  veteran  though  he  be. 
Sitting  near  him  as  has  been  my  fortune  since  I  had  the  honor 
of  a  seat  in  this  chamber,  I  have  come  to  know  something  of  his 
conversation,  something  of  his  manners,  something  of  his  at 
tainments,  something  of  his  abilities,  something  of  his  char 
acter,  ay,  sir,  and  something  of  his  associations;  and  while  I 
would  not  disparage  him  in  any  of  these  respects,  I  feel  that  I 
do  not  exalt  myself  unduly,  that  I  do  not  claim  too  much  for 


290  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  position  which  I  hold  or  the  name  which  I  have  established, 
when  I  openly  declare,  that  as  a  Senator  of  Massachusetts,  and 
as  a  man,  I  place  myself  at  every  point  in  unhesitating  com 
parison  with  that  honorable  assailant.  And  to  his  peremptory 
assertion,  that  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  does  not  deny  the  Habeas 
Corpus,  I  oppose  my  assertion,  peremptory  as  his  own,  that  it 
does, — and  there  I  leave  that  issue/' 

The  personal  character  of  the  debate  will  be  seen  from  these 
quotations.  They  illustrate  the  intensity  of  the  feeling  that 
existed  in  Congress  on  the  slavery  question  and  the  difficulties 
with  which  anti-slavery  men  contended.  It  is  important  for 
the  reader  to  understand  these  personal  encounters  of  Sumner 
and  the  part  he  took  in  them  for  it  was  for  what  he  said  of 
Mason  and  Butler  and  South  Carolina,  that  Brooks  attempted 
to  justify  his  assault  on  Sumner  in  the  Senate  Chamber,  at  a 
later  day. 

The  debate  being  closed,  the  motion  for  a  reference  of  the 
petition  to  the  Judiciary  Committee  carried.  But  this  Com 
mittee  reported  against  the  prayer  of  the  petition  and  the 
Senate  adopted  their  report.  Later  in  the  session  Sumner 
sought  to  introduce  a  bill  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law,  but  the  Senate  after  much  wrangling,  refused  him  leave. 
No  progress  was  made  in  anti-slavery  legislation  but  the  anti- 
slavery  vote  in  the  Senate  had  increased  from  four  to  ten. 
^  The  pro-slavery  members  were  not  accustomed  to  such  oppo 
sition  as  Sumner  was  making  to  their  schemes  of  territorial  ex 
pansion.  He  had  been  elected  as  an  opponent  of  slavery.  He 
had  no  political  ambition,  unless  it  was  to  link  his  name  with 
the  destruction  of  this  institution.  The  ordinary  baits  the 
South  had  been  using,  political  preferments,  such  as  the  Presi 
dency,  had  no  attraction  for  him.  An  incident  related  by  him 
self  illustrates  his  feeling.  During  this  session  an  eminent 
supporter  of  the  Nebraska  Bill  said  to  him :  "  I  would  not  go 
through  all  that  you  do  on  this  nigger  question  for  all  the  offices 
and  honors  of  the  country."  To  which  Sumner  promptly 
replied,  "  Nor  would  I, — for  all  the  offices  and  honors  of  the 
country."  In  relating  it,  he  added :  "  Not  in  such  things  are 
the  inducements  to  this  warfare.  If  I  have  been  able  to  do 
aught  in  any  respect  not  unworthy,  it  is  because  I  thought 
rather  of  those  commanding  duties  which  are  above  office  and 
honor." 

But  he  had  a  strong  desire  for  fame  of  a  more  enduring  sort 
than  office  gave.  His  efforts  in  the  Senate  were  always  pre 
pared  as  for  a  great  occasion,  he  put  aside  personalities  which 
appealed  to  the  galleries  but  he  felt  there  was  nothing  to  be  lost 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  291 

by  telling  his  Southern  colleagues  he  was  as  good  as  they  were 
and  would  brook  no  airs  of  superiority.  It  was  a  manly  self- 
respect  he  asserted  and  it  found  an  answering  response  at 
home. 

It  was  after  this  debate  that  Whittier  wrote  the  poem  already 
referred  to  reminding  him  of  the  evening,  when  they  had 
loitered  by  the  sea  at  Lynn  and  he  had  foretold  Sumner's  elec 
tion  to  the  Senate.  He  now  saw  the  large  future,  which  he  then 
predicted,  fulfilled  in  his  actual  life. 

Until  this  debate  Sumner  maintained  pleasant  relations  with 
the  Southern  Senators,  but  from  this  time  forward  their  in 
timacy  ceased  and  few  of  them  recognized  him  socially.  Their 
feeling  towards  him  was  bitter.  Threats  were  made  of  expelling 
him  from  the  Senate,  and  with  the  votes  they  controlled  there 
was  some  reason  to  fear  such  a  result.  It  must  be  confessed 
that  Sumner  was  not  without  feeling.  He  wrote  to  Howe 
during  this  session :  "  This  Congress  is  the  worst, — or  rather 
promises  to  be  the  worst  since  the  Constitution  was  adopted; 
it  is  the  '  Devil's  Own/ ?; 

The  letters  written  him  from  Massachusetts,  show  that  the 
debates  of  the  session  had  been  followed  with  interest  and  that 
the  political  tide  was  turning  his  way.  One  of  his  former 
opponents  wrote  him :  "  Differing  with  you  as  I  do  in  political 
sentiments  and  having  no  other  connection  with  public  affairs 
than  what  pertains  to  every  citizen,  I  desire,  nevertheless,  to 
express  to  you,  what  I  believe  to  be  the  general  feeling  among 
all  classes  of  reflecting  minds  here,  an  admiration  for  the 
dignified  and  gentlemanly  bearing  with  which  you  have  gone 
through  the  contest  and  rebuked  this  ruffian  onslaught,  and  to 
say,  moreover,  that  we  should,  I  have  no  doubt,  all  unite,  from 
all  sides  as  one  man,  in  sending  you  back  to  the  Senate,  should 
the  maniac  threats  of  expulsion  by  any  possibility  be  carried 
into  effect." 

Some  of  his  friends  referred  to  his  conduct  or  expressions  in 
a  speech  on  one  occasion  and  others  to  something  on  another 
occasion  as  seeming  especially  admirable  to  them.  But  they  all 
agreed  that  his  course  during  the  stormy  scenes  of  the  session 
had  admirably  represented  the  sentiment  of  the  State.  One 
had  cried,  (( Just  the  thing ! "  when  he  read  his  answer  to 
Butler,  inquiring  whether  he  would  aid  in  sending  back  a 
fugitive  slave ;  another  thought  that  it  was  his  reply  to  Mason 
that  had  made  him  think  for  once  in  his  life  that  a  Southern 
gentleman  had  been  "  squeezed  through  the  little  end  of  the 
horn."  Wendell  Phillips  "  liked  and  entirely  approved  the  self- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

respect  with  which  he  put  his  own  opinion  side  by  side  with  the 
Virginian's  and  left  it." 

An  old  man,  formerly  a  Member  of  Congress,  wrote  him : 
"  Your  contest  in  the  Senate  brought  vividly  to  my  recollection 
similar  scenes  which  many  years  since  I  saw  J.  Q.  Adams  pass 
ing  through.  And  now  how  miserably  insignificant  and  mean, 
to  the  eyes  of  the  intelligent  and  honorable  of  the  whole  civilized 
world,  do  these  rascally  pigmies  look!  and  how  '  the  old  man 
eloquent '  looms  up  !  Truth  is  mighty ;  never  fear, — sometime 
or  other  she  will  take  care  of  you;  nay,  she  is  doing  it  now 
with  all  who  can  see,  and  even  with  multitudes  of  your  oppon 
ents  who  see  plainly  enough  but  dare  not  speak.  In  one  respect 
you  have  beaten  '  the  old  man '  even.  You  have  kept  your 
temper  better  than  he  used  always  to  do." 

The  revolution  of  political  feeling  in  the  State  was  fast  tend 
ing  to  break  up  old  party  ties.  A  new  party  was  being  organ 
ized,  the  Republican.  The  Abolitionists  were  going  into  it  as  a 
body  and  there  was  a  drift  towards  it,  from  both  the  Whigs  and 
the  Democrats,  many  of  whom  were  dissatisfied  with  the  tem 
porizing  policy  of  the  old  parties  on  the  slavery  question.  Early 
in  the  summer,  the  Republicans  bid  fair  to  carry  the  State. 
The  leaders  were  eager  for  Sumner  to  join  them.  He  was 
urgently  pressed  by  the  Provisional  State  Chairman,  John  A. 
Andrew,  to  be  present  and  address  the  State  Convention  to  be 
held  at  Worcester  on  September  seventh.  They  felt  that  his 
presence  after  the  exciting  scenes  in  which  he  had  taken  part 
in  Congress  and  the  desire  of  the  people  to  see  and  hear  him 
would  draw  many  to  the  Convention,  if  he  would  consent  to 
speak.  He  consented  and  promised  his  sympathy  and  support 
to  the  new  movement. 

Sumner  received  a  flattering  reception,  when  he  appeared 
before  the  Convention.  He  was  still  a  young  man,  only  forty- 
three  years  of  age,  in  the  prime  of  mental  vigor  and  manly 
strength,  his  face  still  unseamed  by  age  or  suffering.  And  yet 
he  bore  with  him  the  laurels  of  a  victor.  For  had  he  not  gone 
forth  from  these  scenes  a  few  years  before  the  representative 
of  a  few  Abolitionists  ;  and  was  he  not  now  returning  to  a  State, 
driven  by  the  stern  march  of  events,  to  his  position  ?  When  he 
came  into  the  Convention,  the  audience  received  him  standing 
and  with  cheers.  He  was  conducted  to  the  platform  and  the 
Convention  suspended  other  business  to  hear  him  speak.  His 
subject  was  the  duty  of  Massachusetts  in  this  new  crisis  and 
how  it  should  be  discharged, — what  to  do  and  how  to  do  it.  He 
recited  the  recent  encroachments  of  slavery  in  the  arrest  of 
Burns  and  the  appearance  of  the  slave-hunter  in  the  streets  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  293 

Boston,  and  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  the  de 
struction  of  a  time-honored  landmark  of  Freedom  pledged  to 
perpetuity  by  slavery,  for  benefits  long  ago  received,  and  ever 
since  actually  enjoyed.  He  urged  the  necessity  for  a  union  of 
the  men  of  all  parties,  opposed  to  slavery,  that  they  should 
throw  aside  old  ties  and  join  heartily  under  the  one  banner  of 
the  Republicans,  to  withstand  the  encroachments  of  the  South. 

His  two  objects  were;  first,  to  vindicate  the  necessity  for  a 
new  party;  second,  to  prevent  the  enforcement  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law  in  Massachusetts  by  convincing  his  fellow  citizens 
that  being  against  conscience  and  the  Constitution,  they  should 
refuse  to  lend  any  aid  to  its  enforcement.  Concluding  he  bade 
them  be  of  good  cheer  and  to  hope.  He  knew  the  difficulties 
too  well  that  lay  between  them  and  success,  how  little  there  was 
even  in  public  life  to  tempt  an  honest  man  who  wished,  by  some 
thing  he  had  done,  to  leave  the  world  better  than  he  found  it. 
But  still,  to  hope !  Already  more  than  half  the  people  of  the 
Commonwealth  wished  to  be  rid  of  slavery.  Let  them  not 
scatter  their  votes,  but  unite  in  one  firm  organization,  without 
thought  of  compromise ;  and  the  triumph  of  Freedom  would  be 
realized,  not  only  in  Massachusetts,  but  in  the  whole  country. 

The  speech  was  received  with  great  enthusiasm.  It  was  one 
of  Sumner's  telling  efforts  that  met  the  wants  of  the  hour,  like 
his  Faneuil  Hall  speech  of  November  sixth,  1850,  that  was  said 
to  have  made  him  Senator.  The  speech  was  made  before  the 
days  of  the  telegraph  and  the  Boston  Traveller  ran  a  special 
train  from  Worcester  to  Boston,  a  distance  of  forty  miles,  in 
one  hour, — a  great  feat  of  railroading  then, — to  lay  it  before 
the  people  without  delay. 

The  Convention  nominated  Henry  Wilson  for  Governor  and 
Increase  Sumner  for  Lieutenant-Governor;  John  A.  Andrew 
was  made  chairman  of  the  State  Executive  Committee.  The 
party  started  with  high  hopes.  But  the  efforts  made  by  the  old 
party  journals  and  leaders,  especially  the  Whig,  to  keep  their 
voters  in  line,  caused  its  defeat.  This  was  accomplished  by 
keeping  alive  and  stirring  up  old  party  animosities  against  the 
Free-Soilers,  of  whom  the  new  party  was  largely  composed. 
Voters  at  first  favorably  impressed,  were  thus  kept  from  joining 
it.  The  "  American  Party "  better  known  as  the  "  Know- 
Nothing",  whose  cardinal  principle  was  hostility  to  foreign- 
born  citizens,  especially  Catholics,  and  which  was  an  oath, 
bound,  secret  organization,  was  largely  the  outcome.  Voters 
would  not  support  the  old  parties,  after  the  Nebraska  legisla 
tion  ;  their  prejudices  kept  them  from  voting  with  the  Republi 
cans,  and  they  satisfied  their  desire  for  a  change  by  seeking  ref- 


294  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

uge  in  Know-Nothingism.  The  movement  became  general. 
Wilson  joined  it.  The  result  was,  the  Republicans  poled  only 
six  thousand  votes  while  the  Know-Nothings  elected  their  State 
ticket  and  a  legislature  and  thereby  later  made  Wilson  a  United 
States  Senator.  The  next  year  Know-Nothingism  disappeared 
and  the  Republican  party  came  to  the  front.  Know-Nothingism 
was  the  path  from  both  the  old  parties  to  the  new. 

Sumner  had  no  patience  with  Know-Nothingism  and  refused 
to  encourage  it  by  his  voice  or  his  vote.  Its  principles  were 
distasteful  to  him.  He  was  opposed  to  secrecy  in  political 
affairs ;  and  he  thought  this  country  should  be  an  asylum  for  the 
oppressed  of  all  nations,  that  a  party  organization  could  not 
be  permanent  that  placed  opposition  to  citizens  because  they 
were  foreign  born,  among  its  cardinal  principles.  The  peculiar 
turn  political  events  had  taken  in  Massachusetts  led  him  to  re 
frain  from  taking  any  part  in  the  campaign  after  his  speech 
before  the  Republican  convention. 

His  only  other  public  appearance  during  this  vacation  of 
Congress  was  on  November  13,  1854,  when  he  delivered  an 
address  to  the  Mercantile  Library  Association  of  Boston,  in 
troductory  to  its  annual  course  of  lectures.  The  association 
was  composed  of  two  thousand  young  men,  engaged  in  mercan 
tile  pursuits,  having  a  large  library  and  organized  for  the 
moral  and  intellectual  improvement  of  its  members.  He  chose 
for  his  subject  the  "  Position  and  Duties  of  the  Merchant,  illus 
trated  by  the  life  of  Granville  Sharp  "  and  he  sought  to  show 
by  the  life  of  this  good  merchant,  the  author  of  English  Eman 
cipation,  how  much  good  can  be  accomplished  and  how  much 
fame  can  be  gathered  by  the  well  directed  efforts  and  only  the 
small  means  of  a  merchant's  clerk. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  how  instinctively  in  hours  of  re 
laxation,  Sumner  turned  to  books.  They  were  his  recreation 
for  respite  from  toil  and  care.  His  official  duties  were  often 
distasteful,  the  pressure  of  office  seekers  for  places,  the  habitual 
ill-humor  now  of  the  Southern  Members  made  his  position  dis 
agreeable.  Life  until  his  entrance  to  the  Senate  had  been  so 
different.  His  separation  from  his  books  he  felt  as  one  of  the 
hardships  of  his  position  and  he  sometimes  regretted  the  change. 

There  is  no  more  fruitful  and  certain  source  of  recreation 
than  the  reading  of  good  books.  They  enter  into  the  life  of 
the  busy  and  anxious  man  and  steal  care  away  before  he  is 
aware.  Nowhere  else  can  such  relief  be  found.  If  he  loses 
himself  in  the  crowd  on  the  street  or  seeks  the  solitude  of  the 
woods  or  the  sea  still  the  never  ending  cares  of  life  come  back 
to  him  constantly.  In  ceaseless  waking  thoughts,  when  every- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  295 

thing  is  silent  and  he  is  left  alone,  they  make  the  night  cheer 
less.  But  let  the  weary  man  settle  down  to  the  reading  of  a 
good  book  and  how  soon  his  thoughts  are  far  away,  absorbed  in 
the  scenes  of  its  pages,  bringing  change  and  rest,  the  old  sad 
visions  crowded  out  by  the  new  and  the  good. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

SESSION"  OF  '54—5 TOUCEY  BILL LECTURES  BEFORE  ANTI-SLAV 
ERY  ASSOCIATIONS VISITS  THE  SOUTH  AND  WEST PASS- 
MORE  WILLIAMSON ELECTION  OF  1855 

AFTER  the  long  season  of  storm,  in  the  last  session  of  Con 
gress  there  was  a  tacit  agreement  on  all  sides  to  let  slavery  rest 
for  a  while.  During  the  session  of  1854-5,  this  quiet  was  hardly 
broken.  Sumner  occupied  himself  with  other  questions.  He 
introduced  a  resolution  against  the  enforced  contributions  from 
sailors  for  the  support  of  Hospitals  and  he  spoke  on  a  bill  to 
secure  to  seamen,  in  case  of  wreck,  the  wages  already  earned. 

Once  late  in  the  session  the  slavery  question  came  up  in  the 
discussion  of  a  bill  introduced  by  Toucey  of  Connecticut,  a 
Democrat,  on  February  twenty-third,  providing  for  the  re 
moval  to  the  Federal  Courts  of  all  causes  for  damages  brought 
in  the  State  Courts  against  United  States  officers,  for  acts  done 
in  the  discharge  of  any  duty  under  the  laws  of  Congress. 
There  was  no  mention  in  the  bill,  of  slavery,  or  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law.  It  was  introduced  and  its  passage  was  insisted 
on  as  a  matter  of  little  interest.  But  Chase,  who  was  a 
thorough  lawyer  at  once  caught  its  purpose  to  promote  the 
apprehension  of  fugitive  slaves;  and  he  promptly  opposed  its 
passage.  The  anti-slavery  men  asked  for  time  that  it  might 
be  fully  discussed,  but  the  slavery  men  as  usual  pressed  its 
passage  and  as  usual  it  was  rushed  through.  Slavery  under 
stood  its  purpose,  was  in  favor  of  it  and  had  the  votes  to  pass 
it.  Why  should  it  favor  discussion?  February  twenty-third 
was  Friday ;  and  this  was  a  day  of  the  week  devoted,  according 
to  the  usage  of  the  Senate,  to  the  consideration  of  private 
bills.  "  Our  day  of  justice''  Sumner  called  it.  Upwards  of 
seventy-five  bills  were  on  the  calendar  for  consideration.  But 
everything  of  a  routine  character  was  made  to  wait  on  slavery ; 
and  this  bill  was  allowed  to  consume  the  entire  day.  Wade  in 
his  pungent  style,  nettled  its  advocates  by  calling  attention  to 
the  increased  anti-slavery  vote  of  the  North.  Wilson  made  his 
maiden  speech  in  the  Senate  upon  it.  But  Seward  spoke  best. 

Sumner  secured  the  floor  at  midnight.  He  reminded  the 
Senate  that  once  before  he  had  been  compelled  to  speak  at  this 
late  hour  or  be  silent  in  the  presence  of  the  encroachment  of 

296 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  297 

slavery.  "  It  is  hardly/'  he  remarked,  "  an  accidental  conjunc 
tion  which  constantly  brings  slavery  and  midnight  together." 
Finding  that  the  liberty  of  free  colored  persons  was  often  en 
dangered  by  the  operation  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  several 
of  the  Northern  states  had  passed  laws  to  protect  them  from 
this  danger  by  insuring  them  the  protection  of  trial  by  jury 
and  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus.  Some  States  also  prohibited  the 
use  of  their  county  jails  and  volunteer  militia,  in  the  enforce 
ment  of  the  law.  The  advocates  of  the  bill  inveighed  against 
these  laws;  but  Sumner  defended  them  and  insisted  that  the 
attempts  to  enforce  the  law  had  only  resulted  in  riots  and  blood 
shed  and  disturbance  of  business  and  that  already  three  states 
by  formal  resolution  had  demanded  its  repeal  and  two  courts 
had  declared  it  unconstitutional;  and  yet  this  bill  was  intro 
duced  to  bolster  up  this  infamous  law. 

Rush  of  Texas  interrupted  him  to  say  that  if  the  officers 
appointed  to  execute  the  law  were  to  be  left  unprotected,  the 
law  should  be  repealed.  Sumner  answered  that  he  proposed  to 
make  that  very  motion  before  he  sat  down,  as  he  had  already 
done  twice  before,  and  he  would  press  it  to  a  vote.  Benjamin  of 
Louisiana  and  Butler  of  South  Carolina,  the  latter  already 
showing  the  lateness  of  the  hour  in  his  too  frequent  cups,  could 
not  be  silent.  Sumner  closed  by  moving  the  repeal  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays.  Butler 
thereupon  arose  and  asked  Sumner  the  very  question  he  had 
asked  him  once  before  and  which  Sumner  had  answered  then 
so  pointedly,  whether,  if  the  law  were  repealed,  Sumner  would 
recommend  the  State  of  Massachusetts  to  pass  a  law  to  de-liver 
up  fugitives  from  slavery.  To  which  Sumner  promptly  an 
swered  :  No !  Butler,  after  some  foolish  talk  about  the  right  of 
a  man  with  such  opinions  to  a  seat  in  the  Senate  and  a  rejoinder 
by  Sumner,  said  he  knew  Sumner  was  not  a  tactician  and  that 
he  would  not  take  "  advantage  of  the  infirmity  of  a  man,  who 
did  not  know  half  his  time  what  he  was  talking  about," — a  fling 
which  coming  from  Butler  whose  condition  was  apparent,  and 
referring  to  Sumner,  whose  abstinence  was  well  known,  pro 
voked  laughter  from  the  Senate. 

The  vote  on  Sumner's  motion,  to  amend  the  pending  bill  so 
as  to  make  it  a  bill  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law, 
was,  yeas  9,  nays  30.  But  the  Toucey  bill  passed.  Only  for 
this  one  day  was  the  harmony  of  the  session  disturbed  by 
slavery.  The  session  closed  on  the  third  day  of  March,  1855. 

During  the  previous  fall  a  course  of  lectures  was  organized 
in  Boston  and  in  New  York  for  the  discussion  of  slavery.  This 
fact  marks  a  distinct  advance  in  anti-slavery  warfare.  That 


298  LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

such  a  thing  was  possible  in  these  two  cities  shows  how  much 
the  cause  had  grown  in  popularity  since  Sumner  delivered  his 
lecture  in  1847,  seven  years  before,  on  "  White  Slavery  in  the 
Barbary  States/'  so  as  to  get  a  hearing  for  his  subject  by  mask 
ing  it  in  that  form.  Now  on  a  fair  count  the  voters  of  his 
state  against  slavery  were  in  the  majority  and  this  majority 
had  two  representatives  in  the  United  States  Senate.  Sumner 
was  asked  to  deliver  the  opening  lectures  in  the  New  York  and 
Boston  courses,  but,  owing  to  a  severe  cold,  he  was  compelled 
to  decline  both,  though  he  had  accepted  the  Boston  invitation. 
He  afterwards  delivered  the  concluding  lecture  in  each  course. 

Sumner's  note  to  the  Boston  committee  declining  their  first 
invitation  shows  us  his  care  in  keeping  engagements.  He 
wrote;  "It  is  my  habit  to  keep  my  engagements.  Not  for  a 
single  day  have  I  been  absent  from  my  seat  in  the  Senate  during 
the  three  sessions  in  which  duty  has  called  me  there ;  and  never 
before  in  the  course  of  numerous  undertakings  to  address  public 
bodies,  at  different  times  and  in  different  places,  has  there  been 
any  failure  through  remissness  or  disability  on  my  part." 

Sumner  delivered  the  concluding  lecture  of  the  Boston  course 
in  March,  after  the  adjournment  of  Congress.  During  his 
unoccupied  time  he  had  been  making  careful  preparation  for 
this  appearance;  the  course  being  one  in  whose  success  he 
felt  a  deep  interest.  The  lecture  was  delivered  in  Tremont 
Temple,  which  was  crowded  to  overflowing.  On  the  stage  be 
side  him  sat  two  children,  whose  release  from  their  owner  in 
Virginia,  with  that  of  their  mother,  he  had  negotiated  for,  dur 
ing  -the  previous  winter,  at  the  instance  of  the  father,  who  had 
escaped  from  slavery  and  afterwards  purchased  his  own  free 
dom  and  now,  through  Sumner,  that  of  his  family.  The  chil 
dren  were  very  light,  almost  white,  in  appearance,  and  their  at 
tractive  faces,  with  the  fate  they  had  so  narrowly  escaped,  were 
well  calculated  to  arouse  the  fathers  and  mothers  of  a  Northern 
audience  against  slavery. 

Sumner  had  not  yet  given  away,  in  his  speeches,  the  present 
effect  he  could  have  with  an  audience,  for  the  permanent  in 
fluence  he  might  afterwards  have  with  those  who  would  read 
what  he  said.  Later  in  life  he  lost  some  of  his  effectiveness,  by 
the  attention  he  paid  to  how  his  speeches  would  read  when 
printed. 

This  lecture  was  delivered  to  a  cultured  audience  and  was 
received  with  such  favor  that  he  was  called  upon  to  deliver  it 
again  in  the  same  hall  a  few  days  later.  The  call  for  it  was  such 
that  he  afterwards  delivered  it  in  many  other  places  in  Mas 
sachusetts, — including  Worcester,  Lowell  and  Lynn, — and  in 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  299 

the  principal  cities  of  New  York, — at  Auburn,  where  he  was  the 
guest  of  Seward,  who  introduced  him  to  the  audience  as  "  the 
statesman  on  whose  shoulders  the  mantle  of  John  Quincy  Adams 
had  fallen, — the  young  man  eloquent,"  at  Albany,  Syracuse, 
Utica  and  Eochester.  He  was  asked  to  deliver  it  in  several  of 
the  Western  States,  but  declined.  On  May  ninth  he  delivered  it 
in  Metropolitan  Theatre  in  New  York  city  and  the  demand  for 
it  was  so  great  that  he  delivered  it  the  next  night  in  Brooklyn, 
where  Henry  Ward  Beecher  presided ;  and  then  in  Niblo's  Thea 
tre,  New  York.  It  was  printed  in  The  Tribune  of  New  York, 
The  National  Era  in  Washington  and  The  Independent. 

This  was  Sumner's  first  appearance  in  New  York  city.  The 
Tribune  spoke  thus  of  his  "  Three  Days  oration,"  as  it  was 
called :  "  That  a  lecture  should  be  repeated  in  New  York  is 
a  rare  occurrence.  That  a  lecture  on  anti-slavery  should  be 
repeated  in  New  York,  even  before  a  few  despised  f  fanatics  *  is 
an  unparalleled  occurrence.  But  that  an  anti-slavery  lecture 
should  be  repeated  night  after  night  to  successive  multitudes, 
each  more  enthusiastic  than  the  last,  marks  the  epoch  of  a  revo 
lution  in  popular  feeling ;  it  is  an  era  in  the  history  of  Liberty. 
Niblo's  Theatre  was  crowded  last  evening  long  before  the 
hour  of  commencement.  Hundreds  stood  through  the  three 
hours'  lecture." 

Suinner's  subject  was  "  The  Anti-Slavery  Enterprise ;  its 
Necessity,  Practicability  and  Dignity."  He  sometimes  opened 
his  address  with  the  striking  presentation  of  some  thought.  The 
opening  of  this  one,  at  Metropolitan  Theatre,  illustrates  my 
meaning. 

"  History,"  he  said  "  abounds  in  vicissitudes.  From  weak 
ness  and  humility,  men  ascend  to  power  and  place.  From  defeat 
and  disparagement,  enterprises  are  borne  on  to  recognition  and 
triumph.  The  martyr  of  to-day  is  gratefully  enshrined  on  the 
morrow.  The  stone  that  the  builders  rejected  is  made  the  head 
of  the  corner.  Thus  it  always  has  been  and  ever  will  be." 

He  then  referred  to  the  few  years  before  when  a  Female  Anti- 
Slavery  Society,  sitting  in  a  small  room  of  an  upper  story  in  an 
obscure  building  in  Boston,  was  insulted  and  then  driven  out 
of  doors  by  a  frantic  crowd  politely  termed  at  the  time  "  gentle 
men  of  standing  and  property  "  and  to  William  Lloyd  Garrison, 
insulted  and  threatened  and  dragged  through  the  streets  until 
he  was  rescued  and  thrown  into  jail  for  protection,  in  contrast 
with  this  mighty  assembly,  counted  by  thousands,  ruffled  only 
by  generous  competition  to  participate  in  the  occasion.  "  Here 
is  a  great  change,"  he  continued,  "worthy  of  notice  and  mem 
ory,  for  it  attests  the  first  stage  of  victory." 


300          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

The  purpose  of  Simmer's  lecture  was  to  show  the  legal  and 
political  condition  of  the  slaves  in  the  South,  the  necessity  for 
the  anti-slavery  enterprise  and  to  answer  the  arguments  made 
against  it.  Quoting  from  the  laws  of  several  slave  States, 
he  showed  that  human  beings  were  held  merely  as  chattels, 
in  other  words  as  personal  property.  The  slave  had  no  rec 
ognition  in  law,  as  a  soul  capable  of  happiness  here  and  of 
immortality-  hereafter.  "  The  slave  "  he  said,  "  may  seem  to 
have  a  wife,  but  he  has  not,  for  his  wife  belongs  to  his  master. 
He  may  seem  to  have  a  child,  but  he  has  not,  for  his  child  is 
owned  by  his  master.  He  may  be  filled  with  the  desire  of 
knowledge,  opening  to  him  the  gate  of  joy  on  earth  and  in 
heaven;  but  the  master  may  impiously  close  all  these  gates." 
A  wrong  so  transcendent,  he  insisted  should  be  righted.  "  Free 
dom  and  Slavery  can  hold  no  divided  empire;  nor  can  there 
be  any  true  repose,  until  Freedom  is  everywhere  established." 
To  the  favorite  argument  of  the  South  that  Noah's  curse  against 
Canaan  made  him  the  servant  of  servants  unto  his  brethren, 
he  answered  that  this  malediction  did  not  change  Canaan  to  a 
chattel,  much  less  his  posterity;  that  the  African  could  neither 
be  proven  to  be  the  descendant  of  Canaan,  nor  all  slave  masters 
to  be  the  descendants  of  Shem  or  Japheth.  While  he  admitted 
that  the  New  Testament  contained  many  injunctions  for  mas 
ters  and  servants,  conditions  that  must  always  exist,  he  insisted 
that  nowhere,  in  the  spirit  of  the  teachings  of  Christ,  could 
they  find  any  authority  for  slavery,  whereby  a  human  soul  was 
reduced  to  the  condition  of  an  ox. 

The  first  step  necessary  to  the  practicability  of  emancipation, 
he  argued,  was  to  openly  confront  it.  When  soberly  studied 
men  would  unite  in  applying  the  remedy  to  such  an  assemblage 
of  unquestionable  wrongs  as  slavery  would  be  found  to  be. 
If  the  question  be  determined  by  absolute  justice,  compensation 
should  be  made  to  the  slaves  and  not  to  the  masters  upon  free 
dom  being  granted.  Still  he  was  disposed  to  consider  the 
question  of  compensation  to  the  master,  for  freedom  to  the 
slave  one  of  expediency,  to  be  determined  by  the  exigencies  of 
the  hour,  though  such  he  confessed  was  his  anxiety  for  the  dis 
appearance  of  slavery  that  he  would  not  hesitate  to  build  a 
bridge  of  gold  "  if  necessary  for  the  retreating  fiend."  The  as 
sumption  that  slave  labor  was  more  profitable  than  free  had 
been  exploded  by  the  census ;  and  the  arguments  that  the  slaves 
were  not  prepared  for  freedom  was  as  foolish  as  the  refusal  of 
the  mother  to  let  her  son  enter  the  water,  until  he  first  knew 
how  to  swim.  Its  danger  to  master  or  slave  could  not  be  plead, 
in  the  face  of  numerous  instances,  where  as  in  Jamaica  or  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  301 

Barbadoes,  the  disproportion  in  numbers  was  greater  than  in 
this  country,  and  yet  emancipation  there  had  been  attended 
with  no  danger.  If  with  all  the  wrongs  of  the  slave,  his  wife 
ravished  from  his  arms,  his  child  swept  to  the  auction  block,  the 
fruits  of  his  labor  appropriated  by  another,  the  master  still  slept 
secure,  why  should  he  be  less  so  in  the  presence  of  his  slave  with 
all  these  wrongs  righted.  "The  highest  safety  is  in  doing 
right." 

The  dignity  of  the  enterprise,  he  argued,  was  vindicated  by 
the  loftiness  of  the  cause  of  freedom  throughout  all  ages  and 
the  numbers  of  human  beings  now  sought  to  be  benefitted. 
It  could  not  be  belittled  by  the  hard  names  and  personal  dis 
paragement  heaped  upon  its  advocates.  It  had  ever  been  the 
lot  of  goodness  and  virtue  in  this  world  to  be  reviled  and  tra 
duced.  It  was  not  the  eminent,  the  rich  and  powerful,  the 
favorites  of  fortune  and  of  place  who  most  promptly  welcome 
the  truth  which  brings  change  in  the  existing  order  of  things, 
but  those  in  poorer  condition. 

In  conclusion,  he  reminded  them  that  there  were  according 
to  the  census  reports  only  347,525  slaveholders  and  yet  this 
oligarchy  ruled  the  Kepublic,  determined  its  policy  and  disposed 
of  its  offices.  Their  first  duty  was  the  overthrow  of  this  oli 
garchy.  The  Fugitive  Slave  Law  by  an  aroused  public  senti 
ment  'must  also  be  made  a  dead  letter.  For  his  own  part,  long 
ago,  he  said  he  had  made  up  his  mind  to  have  nothing  to  do  with 
its  execution.  "  I  know  not  if  our  work  will  be  soon  accom 
plished.  *  *  *  But  better  strive  in  this  cause,  even  unsuc 
cessfully,  than  never  strive  at  all.  The  penalty  of  indifference 
is  akin  to  the  penalty  of  opposition, — as  is  well  pictured  by  the 
great  Italian  poet,  when,  among  the  saddest  on  the  banks  of  the 
Acheron,  rending  the  air  with  outcries  of  torment,  shrieks  of 
anger  and  smiting  of  hands,  he  finds  the  troop  of  dreary  souls 
who  had  been  ciphers  in  the  great  conflicts  of  life."  And,  he 
insisted,  that  above  all  things  there  should  be  unity  among  the 
friends  of  Freedom,  unity  even  as  among  the  enemy  there  was 
unity.  A  lesson  must  be  learned  from  them.  As  with  them 
slavery  was  the  mainspring  of  political  life,  from  which  eman 
ated  all  power  and  all  authority  and  among  them  all  differences 
were  swallowed  up  in  the  one  idea,  so  must  it  be  with  the 
friends  of  Freedom.  They  must  unite  in  a  compact  political 
association,  knit  together  by  instincts  of  a  common  danger,  de 
termined  to  enfranchise  the  Government,  powerful  in  numbers, 
wealth  and  intelligence,  but  more  powerful  still  in  an  inspiring 
cause. 

Wherever  it  was  delivered.,  this  address  did  good  for  the  anti- 


302  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

slavery  cause.  It  met  the  arguments  against  emancipation  and 
while  there  was  manifest  the  speaker's  indignation  at  the  wrongs 
of  slavery,  he  did  not  descend  to  abuse  of  the  slave  masters.  It 
was  the  institution  he  attacked,  not  men.  The  recent  uprising 
at  the  North  against  slavery,  enabled  him  to  find  candid  hearers, 
worthy  of  the  preparation  he  had  made  to  present  the  case  fairly 
before  them.  When  he  had  finished,  he  declared  that  he  had 
found  the  people  prepared  as  never  before  to  welcome  the  truth 
and  that  the  country  was  approaching  a  crisis  on  the  slavery 
question  when  Freedom,  would  triumph  or  the  Union  would  be 
dissolved. 

For  a  number  of  years,  Sumner  had  been  wishing  to  visit  the 
West  and  South.  It  will  be  remembered  he  had  foregone  this 
trip  to  serve  as  a  member  of  the  Convention  to  revise  the  Con 
stitution  of  Massachusetts,  in  1853.  He  wished  to  see  slavery 
as  it  appeared  at  home.  So  the  last  of  May  he  set  out  and,  in 
the  course  of  his  trip,  he  visited  eleven  free  and  three  slave 
states.  He  visited  his  friend  Horace  Mann,  then  President  of 
Antioch  College  at  Yellow  Springs,  Ohio,  and  his  colleague  in 
the  Senate,  Salmon  P.  Chase,  at  Cincinnati.  Then  crossing 
into  Kentucky,  he  visited  Cassius  M.  Clay,  at  his  home  near 
Lexington.  This  was  in  the  heart  of  the  famous  Blue  Grass 
Kegion,  one  of  the  finest  farming  districts  of  the  country.  Its 
soil  was  fertile,  having  been  freshly  reclaimed  from  trackless 
forests,  and  its  surface  was  rolling  and  easily  tilled.  To  this, 
civilization  had  added  excellent  roads  and  all  the  improvements 
necessary  to  make  desirable  farms.  It  was  dotted  here  and 
there  with  country  mansions  of  aristocratic  landlords,  nestling 
among  groves  of  native  oak,  surrounded  with  every  conven 
ience  that  would  make  home  happy.  It  was  a  region  as  famed 
for  fine  stock  as  it  was  for  generous  welcome  and  abounding 
hospitality.  The  visit  was  one  long  to  be  remembered. 

Sumner  had  met  Clay  at  a  public  reception,  tendered  to  John 
P.  Hale,  in  Boston,  in  1853.  He  was  subsequently  invited  by 
Clay  to  visit  him  in  Kentucky.  Clay's  home,  called  White  Hall, 
was  surrounded  by  a  fine  grove  containing  almost  every  variety 
of  native  trees  and  some  exotics.  The  immediate  grounds  about 
the  mansion  house,  on  the  estate,  contained  thirty  acres.  Clay 
was  engaged  in  the  breeding  of  thorough-bred  short-horn  cattle 
and  Southdown  sheep.  Sumner  enjoyed  the  open-hearted  hos 
pitality  and  was  pleased  with  the  trees  and  flocks  of  sheep  and 
herds  of  cattle.  He  continued  his  visit  for  several  days. 

While  there,  Clay,  who  was  a  pronounced  Abolitionist  him 
self,  knowing  Sumner's  curiosity  to  see  the  condition  of  slaves, 
on  a  plantation,  took  him  to  the  estate  of  his  brother  Brutus 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  303 

J.  Clay,  near  Paris,  one  of  the  finest  farms  in  the  country, 
where  there  were  more  than  a  hundred  slaves  owned.  The 
slave  families  occupied  separate  houses  built  of  hewed  logs, 
mortared  between,  mostly  of  two  rooms,  one  above  the  other. 
Each  house  had  a  yard  in  front  and  a  garden  behind  and  was 
surrounded  by  a  post  and  rail  fence.  They  were  neatly  white 
washed,  with  such  additions  to  some  of  them,  as  the  taste  of 
the  occupants  dictated;  and  the  supply  of  winter's  wood  was 
carefully  piled  up  for  each.  Upon  the  whole,  they  presented 
an  air  of  neatness  and  comfort  that  Sumner  had  evidently  not 
expected.  Cassius  M.  Clay  showed  the  negro  quarters  to 
Sumner,  politely  anticipating  his  curiosity;  and  they  went 
alone  so  that  he  might  feel  free  to  ask  any  questions  he  desired. 
Sumner  did  not  ask  many,  and  it  is  remembered  that  he  was 
slow  to  express  any  opinions  or  impressions  of  his  own.  When, 
however,  a  little  colored  boy  ran  ahead  to  open  the  gates  for 
them  and  looked  back  smiling,  Sumner's  exclamation,  as  he 
tossed  him  a  coin,  was,  "  Poor  boy !  "  Seemingly  the  thought 
was,  "  Still  with  all  these  creature  comforts,  these  poor  people, 
at  last,  are  only  slaves  !  " 

But  he  saw  other  things  that  proved  to  him,  that  even  physi 
cal  comfort  was  by  no  means  a  uniform  condition.  At  Lex 
ington,  on  the  steps  of  the  Court  House,  he  saw  a  slave  put  up 
and  sold  at  auction  and  made  to  open  his  mouth  and  show  his 
teeth,  like  a  horse,  for  the  satisfaction  of  bidders.  At  another 
place  he  was  left  to  sit  in  his  stage  and  wait  while  the  driver 
"  assisted  to  whip  a  nigger  ".  And  still  again,  while  he  ate  his 
meal  he  was  compelled  to  witness  a  poor  slave  girl  staggered 
under  the  blow  of  a  clenched  fist.  Upon  the  whole,  his  opinion 
of  slavery  was  confirmed  by  what  he  saw.  A  fact  that  im 
pressed  him,  as  much  as  any  other,  was  that  owing  to  prejudice 
and  the  limited  disposition  in  the  South  to  read,  the  Southern 
people  knew  less  about  the  real  condition  of  the  slaves,  than 
the  people  of  the  North. 

He  visited,  at  Lexington,  the  home  and  grave  of  Henry  Clay ; 
and  at  Nashville,  those  of  Andrew  Jackson,  stopping  by  the  way 
to  see  the  Mammoth  Cave.  He  went  down  the  Cumberland  and 
Ohio  rivers  to  Cairo  and  up  the  Mississippi  to  St.  Louis  and 
St.  Paul,  stopping  by  the  way  to  visit  friends  at  several  places. 
He  was  on  the  Great  Lakes,  as  far  north  as  Marquette. 

He  spent  a  fortnight  in  the  forests  of  the  iron  mountains 
on  the  shores  of  Lake  Superior,  cut  off  in  those  solitudes  from 
all  communication  with  the  civilized  world.  As  he  left  the 
harbor  on  a  steamer  bound  for  the  head  of  the  Lake,  he  re 
marked  that  he  had  not  seen  the  newspapers  for  two  weeks  and 


304  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

was  ignorant  of  all  that  had  transpired  in  the  outer  world,  dur 
ing  this  time.  A  fellow  traveller  handed  him  the  dailies  from 
the  principal  cities.  As  his  eye  ran  hurriedly  over  them,  he 
caught  the  intelligence  that  Passmore  Williamson  had  been 
thrown  into  jail  in  Philadelphia  for  a  contempt  of  court  in  a 
slave  case.  He  turned  from  one  paper  to  another  to  gather  the 
details  of  the  case. 

Williamson  was  an  unpretending  citizen,  Secretary  of  a  com 
mittee  of  an  Abolition  Society.  He  had  informed  a  slave 
mother  and  her  two  children  that  having  been  brought,  by  their 
master,  into  a  State  where  slavery  did  not  exist,  they  were  by 
law,  free.  They  had  accordingly  escaped  from  their  master  and 
he  was  unable  to  recover  them  or  even  learn  their  whereabouts. 
He  had  asked  of  the  United  States  District  Court  a  writ  of 
habeas  corpus  against  Williamson,  commanding  him  to  produce 
the  bodies  of  the  mother  and  children  before  the  Court.  The 
writ  was  allowed.  But  Williamson  having  been  brought  into 
Court  answered  that  he  did  not  have  them  in  his  custody,  did 
not  know  their  whereabouts  and  could  not  therefore  comply 
with  the  order  of  the  Court.  He  was,  however,  found  guilty  of 
contempt  and  sent  to  jail. 

As  Sumner  gathered  the  details  of  this  outrageous  judgment, 
he  hesitated  a  little  and  then  inquired  the  name  of  the  island 
the  steamer  was  just  passing.  While  seated  on  the  deck  of  the 
"  North  Star ",  that  beautiful  Sabbath  morning,  where  the 
rocky  outlines  of  Granite  Island  and  the  mountains  of  the 
mainland  were  mirrored  in  the  clear  waters  of  Lake  Superior 
and  where  everything  the  eye  rested  on  was  emblematic  of  peace 
and  purity  and  freedom,  he  wrote  a  thrilling  letter  to  William 
son  in  Moyamensing  Prison. 

"  From  beginning  to  end,  from  side  to  side,"  he  wrote,  "  and 
in  every  aspect,  this  transaction  can  be  regarded  only  as  a  clear, 
indubitable,  and  utterly  unmitigated  outrage.  The  new-fangled 
doctrine,  that  a  master  can  voluntarily  import  his  alleged 
slave — of  course  with  all  the  revolting  incidents  of  slavery — into 
the  Free  States  is  not  more  odious  than  preposterous.  It  is 
scouted,  by  reason,  and  disowned  by  universal  jurisprudence. 
You  were  right  in  disregarding  it.  In  stepping  forward  to 
remind  persons  claimed  as  slaves  on  this  pretext  that  all  such 
claim  is  baseless,  you  did  a  good  work.  It  was  this  knowledge 
which  filled  them  with  confidence  to  regain  their  God-given 
liberty.  And  for  this  it  appears  that  you  have  been  brought 
before  a  man,  '  dressed  in  a  little  brief  authority '  who  has 
cast  you  into  prison/' 

"It  is  a  privilege  to  suffer  for  truth;  and  I  envy  not  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  305 

meanness  of  that  soul  which  would  hesitate  to  prefer  your 
place  within  the  stone  walls  of  a  prison  to  the  cushioned  bench 
of  the  magistrate  by  whose  irrational  and  tyrannical  edict  you 
have  been  condemned." 

Sumner  did  not  hesitate  to  hold  up  the  wrongs  of  slavery. 
He  believed  that  this  was  one  of  the  ways  to  right  them. 

He  returned  home  through  the  Lakes,  stopping  at  Saratoga 
and  the  White  Mountains  and  reached  Boston  during  the  first 
week  of  September.  He  had  been  absent  more  than  three 
months.  Before  going  he  had  hesitated  between  the  choice  of 
this  tour  through  his  own  country  and  a  trip  to  Europe.  But 
feeling  that  the  information  he  would  acquire  by  a  trip  South 
and  West  would  be  more  useful  to  him,  he  had  chosen  it.  He 
afterwards  felt  that  this  choice  was  wisely  made. 

The  campaign  was  attracting  attention  in  Massachusetts, 
when  he  returned.  The  Know-Nothings  were  active  again  and 
voters,  dissatisfied  with  the  Whig  and  Democratic  parties,  were 
still  deserting  them.  Sumner  clung  to  the  hope  of  uniting  all 
anti-slavery  men  in  the  new  Republican  party  and  to  make  its 
cardinal  principle,  opposition  to  slavery.  He  continued  to 
have  no  faith  in  the  principles  of  Know-Nothingism.  He  did 
not  believe  that  a  party  with  such  principles  as  an  oath-bound 
secrecy  and  hostility  to  foreign  born  citizens  or  to  the  mem 
bership  of  any  particular  religious  denomination  could  be  long 
continued  in  power.  Such  principles  would  have  excluded 
William  of  Orange  from  participation  in  the  political  fortunes 
of  England,  Napoleon  from  those  of  France  and  Hamilton 
from  those  of  America.  And  yet  these  were  the  primary  prin 
ciples  of  Know-Nothingism.  Its  opposition  to  slavery,  he  be 
lieved  was  merely  to  catch  votes. 

During  the  campaign  he  spoke  for  the  Republicans,  in  the 
principal  towns  and  cities  of  the  State.  He  urged  men  of  all 
parties  to  unite,  in  this  one,  in  enduring  opposition  to  slavery. 
In  his  speeches  he  boldly  condemned  Know-Nothingism.  As 
his  term  in  the  Senate  was  drawing  to  a  close  and  this  party 
was  in  control  of  the  State  government  and  bade  fair  to  con 
tinue  its  ascendency  for  the  next  year,  when  the  Senator  would 
be  chosen,  while  his  course  was  a  courageous  one,  his  friends, 
many  of  them  at  least,  feared  it  was  not  discreet.  But  he 
believed  that  a  public  man  should  not  be  a  mere  follower  of 
others  in  politics,  but  a  leader,  and  he  went  forward.  His  cour 
age  might  have  cost  him  his  seat.  There  was  some  talk  of  an 
ticipating  the  election  of  his  successor  by  having  the  present 
Legislature  make  the  choice,  but  other  counsels  prevailed.  His 
danger,  however,  continued ;  for  the  Know-Nothings  were  again 
successful  in  electing  a  Governor  and  a  Legislature. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

STORMY   SESSION   OF    CONGRESS — BANKS,    REPUBLICAN,   MADE 

SPEAKER — KANSAS  TROUBLES APPLIES  FOR  ADMISSION 

SUMNER'S   SPEECH — THE  REPLIES   TO   IT — SUMNER'S   RE 
JOINDER 

The  session  of  Congress  which  commenced  on  the  third  day 
of  December,  1855,  was  a  memorable  one.  The  election  had 
shown  a  feeling  of  unrest  prevalent  in  the  country  and  a  dis 
satisfaction  with  the  courses  of  the  two  old  political  parties. 
The  South  had  returned  a  delegation  to  Congress  thoroughly 
loyal  to  slavery,  but  many  districts  in  the  North  had  sent  anti- 
slavery  men.  When  Congress  opened,  the  change  became  ap 
parent.  N.  P.  Banks  of  Massachusetts,  a  pronounced  anti- 
slavery  man  and  a  Republican,  was  the  candidate  for  Speaker 
from  the  North  and  William  Aiken  of  South  Carolina  was  the 
candidate  of  the  South  and  each  represented  the  rival  feelings 
of  the  different  sections  upon  the  slavery  question.  Ballot  after 
ballot  became  necessary  before  a  choice  was  made  and  it  was  not 
till  the  second  day  of  February,  1856,  on  the  one  hundred  and 
thirty-third  ballot,  4feat  Banks  was  elected.  It  was  significant 
that  the  candidates  came  from  the  States  they  did,  Massachus 
etts  and  South  Carolina.  It  was  significant  that  every  vote  , 
Banks  received  was  from  the  North  and  that  his  opponent  had 
the  solid  vote  of  the  South  except  only  one  Cullen's  of  Dela 
ware.  Davis  of  Maryland  declined  to  vote  for  either  candidate. 
For  the  first  time  it  was  the  South  compactly  arrayed  against 
the  North,  section  against  section.  It  was  an  ominous  attitude. 

For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  country  there  was  a 
national  official  elected  by  one  section.  But  Banks'  election 
had  a  deeper  meaning  than  this.  For  the  first  time  in  the 
country's  history,  the  anti-slavery  men  had  scored  a  national 
triumph.  All  their  victories,  till  now,  had  been  local,  a  mem 
ber  of  Congress,  a  Governor,  occasionally  a  U.  S.  Senator.  But 
now  they  had  become  so  strong  that  their  party  assumed  na 
tional  proportions.  One  of  the  most  important  offices  of  the 
nation  was  filled  by  a  man  of  that  conviction  and  because  he 
was  so.  Sumner  wrote  Charles  Francis  Adams:  "I  was  present 
when  he  was  conducted  to  his  chair.  It  was  a  proud  historic 

306 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  307 

moment.  For  the  first  time  during  years  there  seemed  to  be  a 
North.  I  fancied  I  saw  the  star  glittering  over  his  head." 

The  causes  for  this  change  in  public  opinion  were  to  be 
found  in  the  course  of  the  Democratic  party  controlled  by  the 
South.  The  Missouri  Compromise,  the  established  landmark 
of  Freedom,  that  had  been  fixed  with  much  labor  and  had 
grown  sacred  with  age,  had  been  repealed  to  open  the  way  for 
the  extension  of  slavery.  This  had  been  followed  by  the  Kan 
sas-Nebraska  Bill  establishing  these  Territories,  and  opening 
them  to  settlement,  by  people  of  the  South  with  their  slaves, 
and  emigrants  from  the  North,  and  permitting  the  settlers  to 
determine  for  themselves,  whether  they  should  be  slave  or 
free.  The  effect  of  this  legislation  was  to  make  the  Territories 
slave.  They  were  to  continue  so,  unless  the  anti-slavery  men, 
by  a  vote  at  some  subsequent  time  could  wrest  them  away  from 
slavery.  These  successive  encroachments  had  angered  the  anti- 
slavery  people  of  the  North;  and  they  determined,  notwith 
standing  this  legislation  to  make  Kansas  a  free  state.  Kansas 
was  the  debatable  ground,  for  if  it  was  won  for  Freedom,  Ne 
braska  would  certainly  follow.  The  South  was  just  as  de 
termined  to  make  Kansas  a  slave  state.  This  constant  agitation 
had  embittered  the  two  sections. 

The  New  England  Emigrant  Aid  Co.  had  been  incorporated 
in  Massachusetts.  Its  object  and  its  methods  were  perfectly 
legitimate.  It  proposed  to  promote  emigration,  from  the  New 
England  states,  by  furnishing  information  about  Kansas  to 
persons  likely  to  emigrate,  to  cheapen  to  them  the  cost  of  trans 
portation  thither  and,  by  the  building  of  saw  and  flour  mills, 
hotels,  and  school-houses  to  enable  them  to  become  finally  fixed, 
in  permanent  homes.  Its  influence  and  its  means  were  limited. 
It  is  estimated  that  not  more  than  fifteen  hundred  persons 
were  induced  by  it  to  become  residents  of  the  Territory.  The 
South,  watching  with  jealousy  every  movement  of  the  North 
towards  colonization  and  remembering  how  California  had 
recently  slipped  from  its  grasp,  professed  not  to  be  able  to  see 
any  legitimate  purpose  in  the  Emigrant  Aid  Co.  It  knew  that 
the  settlers  thus  furnished  would  almost  certainly  be  against 
slavery.  The  Company,  therefore,  became  the  object  of  bitter 
denunciations. 

Kansas  was  of  vital  importance  to  slavery.  It  was  within 
the  same  parallels  as  Missouri  and  could  raise  the  same  crops. 
Missouri  was  a  slave  State.  Kansas  then  included  a  large  part 
of  what  is  now  Colorado.  It  was  the  gateway  of  the  North  to 
New  Mexico  and  Utah.  New  Mexico  then  included  Arizona; 
and  Utah  included  Nevada.  To  control  Kansas,  therefore. 


308  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

meant  to  control  what  is  now  six  States  and  Territories.  Kan 
sas  would  restore  the  equality,  to  the  South,  in  the  Senate, 
which  had  been  lost  by  the  admission  of  California;  it  would 
also  put  the  South  in  the  way  to  acquire  ten  votes  more.  No 
set  of  statesmen  ever  saw  a  proposition  more  clearly  or  knew 
better  how  they  could  wield  the  advantage  that  would  be  gained, 
if  they  could  only  reach  it,  than  those  of  the  South.  And  this, 
with  a  will,  they  set  themselves  to  accomplish. 

To  secure  Kansas  to  slavery,  the  South  resorted  to  the  boldest 
frauds.  It  conceived  the  plan  of  having  persons  go  there  and 
stake  off  claims  to  desirable  land,  remain  perhaps  a  few  days  in 
tents,  call  themselves  residents  of  the  Territory  so  as  to  be  able 
to  return  and  vote,  whenever  occasion  and  the  interests  of 
slavery  should  require,  and  then  return  to  their  homes  in  slave 
states.  The  nearness  of  the  Territory  to  Missouri,  a  slave  state, 
rendered  this  plan  of  counting  votes  for  slavery  peculiarly  prac 
ticable.  One  Atchison,  who  had  been  a  IT.  S.  Senator  from 
Missouri  and  was  for  several  sessions  President  pro  tern  of  the 
Senate,  and  another,  Stringfellow,  were  especially  prominent, 
frequently  leading  bands,  under  arms,  from  Missouri  to  Kansas 
to  accomplish  such  purposes;  and,  under  their  leadership  were 
often  committed  gross  outrages,  against  the  rights  of  citizenship 
and  property,  sometimes  amounting  to  the  shedding  of  inno 
cent  blood. 

Four  sons  of  John  Brown  had  early  settled  in  the  Territory ; 
and  the  father  soon  after  left  his  little  farm  among  the  Adiron- 
dacks  and  followed  them.  The  father  and  sons  were  sworn  en 
emies  of  slavery.  The  old  man  had  early  in  life  declared  his 
unalterable  opposition  to  it.  Whether  his  primary  object  in 
emigrating  to  the  Territory  was  to  make  it  a  permanent  home 
or  simply  to  assist  in  saving  it  to  Freedom,  can  never,  perhaps, 
be  certainly  known.  But  such  spirits  could  not  long  remain 
undiscovered,  amid  the  stirring  scenes  into  which  they  were 
cast.  Two  of  the  sons,  while  quietly  attending  to  their  work  in 
the  fields  were  seized  by  a  band  of  Missourians,  under  the  com 
mand  of  a  certain  Pate,  who  delivered  then  into  the  hands  of 
some  Federal  troops.  On  horseback  these  troops  drove  them  on 
foot,  manacled,  without  any  legal  charge  against  them,  over  the 
burning  prairie ;  and  before  the  sun  had  set,  the  younger  John 
Brown  was  a  raving  maniac.  And  yet,  against  the  perpetrators 
personally  of  the  deed  the  father  seemed  to  entertain  no  thought 
of  revenge.  "  What  God  does  is  well  done  " ;  "  Vengeance  is 
mine ;  I  will  repay  saith  the  Lord  " ;  such  texts  seemed  to  con 
sole  him  as  against  the  men  who  did  these  things.  But  he  was 
dreadfully  in  earnest,  in  his  warfare  against  the  institution 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  309 

that  he  held  accountable  for  these  wrongs.  He  was  overcome 
with  emotion  and  shed  tears  when  he  undertook  to  recount 
them  before  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts. 

A  mere  narration  of  some  other  events  in  Kansas  will  show 
the  lengths  Slavery  was  willing  to  go.  A.  M.  Reeder  of  Pennsyl 
vania,  a  Democrat,  had  been  appointed  by  President  Pierce, 
Governor  of  the  Territory.  At  the  time  of  his  selection,  there 
was  no  question  about  his  loyalty  to  Southern  interests.  In 
November,  1854,  Missourians  to  the  number  of  seventeen  hun 
dred  under  the  lead  of  Atchison  came  armed  into  the  Territory 
and  participated  in  the  election  of  Whitfield  to  Congress.  A 
little  later,  in  March,  1855,  they  came  from  Missouri  armed 
to  the  number  of  five  thousand,  and,  marching  to  the  polls, 
where  the  election  of  members  of  the  Legislature  was  being  held 
they  demanded  with  weapons  in  their  hands  that  they  be  al 
lowed  to  vote  and  they  were  permitted  to  do  so.  Governor 
Reeder  issued  certificates  to  a  majority  of  the  members  thus 
chosen,  but,  becoming  convinced  of  the  magnitude  of  the  out 
rage,  he  refused,  finally,  to  recognize  the  Legislature  or  the 
validity  of  its  acts.  He  was  thereupon  removed  by  President 
Pierce,  who  was  in  full  sympathy  with  the  South,  and  Wilson 
Shannon  of  Ohio  was  appointed,  in  his  place.  This  Legislature 
was  worthy  of  its  origin.  In  two  months  it  enacted  eight  hun 
dred  and  twenty-three  pages  of  statutes.  How  this  could  be 
done  so  quickly  was  incredible,  till  it  was  discovered  that  they 
had  re-enacted  the  statutes  of  Missouri  almost  wholesale,  with 
out  in  some  places  even  changing  the  word  "  State  "  to  "  Ter 
ritory  ",  where  it  occurred.  But  its  enactments  upon  the  sub 
ject  of  slavery,  it  made  worse.  It  was  made  a  criminal  offence 
to  declare  openly  or  in  writing  that  slavery  did  not  legally  exist 
in  the  Territory. 

The  Free-Soilers  refused  to  recognize  the  validity  of  these 
elections.  They  knew  that  there  were  only  about  three  thou 
sand  legal  voters  in  the  Territory  and  that  of  the  six  thousand 
votes  counted  for  the  Legislature,  only  eight  hundred  were  cast 
by  actual  settlers.  They  organized  an  independent  movement 
and  chose  Governor  Reeder  their  Representative  in  Congress 
and  sent  him  to  Washington,  to  contest  the  election  of  Whit- 
field.  At  the  same  time  carefully  abstaining  from  recognizing 
the  validity  of  the  enactments  of  the  Legislature  and  yet,  desir 
ing  to  avoid  any  appearance  of  resistance  to  Federal  authority, 
they  deemed  it  best  to  apply  for  admission  as  a  State,  rather 
than  create  a  rival  Legislature.  They  accordingly  chose  dele 
gates  to  a  Constitutional  Convention  to  meet  at  Topeka.  The 
Missourians  assuming  that,  by  these  acts,  the  Federal  authority 


310  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

had  been  defied,  under  pretext  of  assisting  a  pro-slavery  Sheriff, 
in  the  execution  of  a  warrant,  marched  into  the  Territory, 
twelve  hundred  strong,  and  with  arms,  threatened  the  destruc 
tion  of  the  town  of  Lawrence.  This  town  had  been  founded 
mainly  by  settlers  from  New  England,  under  the  auspices  of 
the  Emigrant  Aid  Co.,  and  was  the  stronghold  of  the  Free- 
Soilers.  The  insurgents  encamped  opposite  the  town;  but  find 
ing  it  fortified  and  defended,  its  inhabitants  armed  with 
Sharpens  rifles,  they  retired.  They  were  still  in  the  Territory 
committing  depredations,  when  Congress  assembled  in  Decem 
ber.  But  notwithstanding  these  threats,  the  Constitutional 
Convention  met  at  Topeka,  drafted  a  constitution  prohibiting 
slavery  and  the  question  of  its  adoption  was  submitted  to  the 
people,  in  December,,  and  it  was  adopted.  The  next  month  they 
chose  State  officers  and  a  Legislature  and  the  Legislature  met 
and  elected  two  U.  S.  Senators  and  applied  for  admission  as  a 
State.  But  farther  than  this  they  did  not  exercise  the  functions 
of  their  offices.  They  still  carefully  abstained  from  any  act 
that  could  be  construed  as  a  resistance  of  Federal  authority, 
knowing  the  President's  hostility. 

President  Pierce,  acting  as  it  was  understood,  under  the 
inspiration  of  his  Secretary  of  War,  Jefferson  Davis,  afterwards 
President  of  the  Confederacy,  had  already  sent  Federal  troops 
into  the  Territory,  under  the  pretence  of  preserving  the  peace 
and  sustaining  the  National  authorities ;  but  already  committed 
to  the  projects  of  the  South  and  being  now  in  the  full  tide  of  a 
campaign  for  renomination,  he  was  in  reality  thus  using  his 
power,  to  aid  the  South,  in  its  efforts  for  supremacy,  in  the 
Territory.  The  Free-Soilers  were,  in  his  eyes,  traitors  and 
their  acts  revolutionary;  the  Legislature  they  ignored  was  to 
him  a  lawfully  elected  and  organized  body  and  he  threatened 
to  enforce  obedience  to  its  enactments  at  the  point  of  the 
bayonet.  On  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  January,  1856,  he  sent 
a  special  message  to  Congress,  calling  attention  to  the  condi 
tion  of  affairs  in  Kansas.  Here  appeared  again  his  usual 
method  of  apologizing  for  the  conduct  of  the  insurgents,  ap 
proving  all  the  acts  of  the  slaveholders  and  condemning  the 
efforts  of  the  Free-Soilers.  The  message  brought  the  whole 
matter  lawfully  to  the  attention  of  Congress.  The  Administra 
tion  proceeded  to  place  the  Federal  troops  in  Kansas  at  the 
service  of  Governor  Shannon,  who  was  in  sympathy  with  the 
South.  The  eyes  of  the  Nation  were  upon  Kansas,  where 
the  opening  scenes  of  the  Civil  War  were  being  enacted. 

A  week  after  the  President's  message  was  received,  on  Feb 
ruary  second,  the  House  being  organized  by  the  election  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  31 1 

Banks,  Speaker,  the  question  of  Kansas  came  up  for  considera 
tion.  Whitfield  and  Keeder  were  present,  rival  claimants  for 
a  seat,  each  insisting  that  he  was  the  lawfully  elected  Repre 
sentative,  each  fresh  from  the  field  of  strife  and  aggressive  in 
the  cause  he  represented.  There  was  little  disposition  on  the 
part  of  the  House  to  postpone  a  question  of  such  importance. 
After  some  discussion  it  became  apparent  that  the  means  at 
hand  furnished  little  aid  in  the  solution  of  the  question  and 
against  the  protest  of  the  Southern  members  a  committee  was 
appointed  to  go  to  Kansas  and  make  a  personal  investigation 
of  the  condition  of  affairs  in  the  Territory.  Here  was  a  second 
triumph  of  the  Free-Soilers  and  a  second  defeat  of  the  Admin 
istration.  The  committee  consisted  of  Howard  of  Michigan, 
Sherman  of  Ohio  and  Oliver  of  Missouri.  Sherman  was  then 
a  young  man,  thirty-three  years  of  age,  serving  his  second  term 
in  Congress,  destined  to  an  unbroken  public  career  extending 
over  a  period  of  forty-two  years.  Howard  and  Sherman  were 
Republicans  and  Oliver  was  a  Democrat. 

The  committee  proceeded  promptly  to  the  Territory  and 
entered  upon  a  searching  investigation,  examining  large  num 
bers  of  witnesses  and  reducing  their  testimony  to  writing.  It 
was  determined  to  get,  what  conservative  people  all  over  the 
North  desired,  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  real  cause  of  the 
troubles  in  Kansas.  Eight  weeks  were  consumed  in  the  in 
vestigation,  the  committee  holding  its  sittings  in  the  towns  of 
Lawrence,  Lecompton,  Topeka  and  Leavenworth  and  on  the 
first  day  of  July,  1856  it  presented  its  report  to  the  House,  in 
which  Howard  and  Sherman  joined,  Oliver  offering  a  dissent. 
They  found  that  the  history  of  the  organization  of  the  Territory 
had  been  one  continual  scene  of  violence  and  disorder, — such 
that  no  adequate  picture  of  it  could  be  given  without  appearing 
extravagant,  that  aid  societies  had  been  organized,  both  North 
and  South,  to  promote  emigration  in  the  interest  of  the  rival 
parties,  which  were  not  in  their  plan  and  purpose  illegal,  but 
that  unlawful  armed  bands  of  marauders  had  repeatedly  come 
into  the  Territory  from  Missouri,  intimidating  the  settlers, 
committing  depredations,  terrorizing  election  officers,  in  great 
numbers  casting  illegal  votes  at  many  elections  and  that  the 
Legislature  assuming  to  act  in  that  capacity  and  pass  laws  for 
the  government  of  the  people  was,  by  reason  of  frauds  in  the 
choice  of  its  members,  an  illegal  body. 

In  the  meantime  events  had  been  hastening  to  a  crisis  in  the 
Senate.  A  week  after  the  proclamation  of  the  President  to  the 
people  of  Kansas,  in  consequence  of  which  the  United  States 
troops  were  placed  at  the  service  of  Governor  Shannon,  in  an- 


312  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

swer  to  a  call  by  the  Senate,  the  President  sent  with  a  special 
message,  the  papers  in  his  possession,  giving  information  of  the 
events  in  the  Territory.  Thereupon  a  short  and  acrimonious 
debate  ensued  between  Wilson  and  Hale  for  the  Free-Soilers 
and  Butler,  Jones,  Toombs  and  Toucey  for  the  Democrats.  The 
latter  showed  ill-temper  and  applied  some  coarse  epithets  to  the 
Free-Soilers  and  they  were  answered  by  Wilson  and  Hale  in  the 
same  spirit.  It  was  noticed  that  there  was  an  increased  tension 
between  the  two  parties.  Intercourse  was  less  frequent  and 
what  there  was,  less  cordial  than  ever  before.  The  talk  of 
secession  and  disunion  was  more  common  and  more  bold.  It 
was  apparent  that  a  storm  was  gathering.  But  there  was  still 
a  disposition  to  await  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Territor 
ies  to  which  the  message  and  documents  had  been  referred. 

This  committee  reported  on  the  twelfth  day  of  March.  Doug 
las,  the  chairman,  on  the  loud  call  of  Butler,  instead  of  send 
ing  the  report  to  the  Clerk's  desk  as  was  customary,  to  be  read 
by  the  Clerk,  advanced  to  the  desk  and  read  it  facing  the 
Senate.  It  was  concurred  in  by  four  members  of  the  com 
mittee.  When  he  finished,  Senator  Collamer  advanced  and 
read  a  dissenting  report  signed  by  himself  alone.  His  position 
showed  something  of  heroism. 

Ten  years  later  in  a  eulogy  upon  Collamer,  Sumner,  describ 
ing  this  scene,  said :  "  The  reports  of  the  committees  were  us 
ually  handed  in  and  ordered  to  be  printed ;  but  now  at  the  im 
passioned  call  of  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina,  the  report 
of  the  Committee,  whitewashing  incredible  outrages,  was  read 
by  the  Chairman  at  the  desk  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate. 
The  Chairman  left  his  seat  for  this  purpose,  and  stood  face  to 
face  with  the  Senate.  For  two  hours  the  apology  for  that  usur 
pation  which  had  fastened  a  Black  Code  upon  an  inoffensive 
people,  sounded  in  this  chamber,  while  the  partisans  of  slavery 
gloated  over  the  seeming  triumph.  There  was  a  hush  of  silence, 
and  there  was  sadness  also  with  some,  who  saw  clearly  the  un 
pardonable  turpitude  of  the  sacrifice.  Mr.  Collamer  followed 
with  a  minority  report  signed  by  himself  alone,  which  he  read 
at  the  desk  of  the  Secretary,  standing  face  to  face  with  the 
Senate.  Jesse  D.  Bright  was  at  the  time  our  President,  but  he 
had  installed  in  the  chair  on  that  momentous  occasion  none 
other  than  that  most  determined  artificer  of  treason  and  drill 
sergeant  of  Rebellion,  John  Slidell,  who  sat  behind  like  Mephis- 
topheles  looking  over  the  shoulder  of  Truth,  while  the  patriot 
Senator,  standing  before,  gravely  unfolded  the  enormities  that 
had  been  perpetrated.  Few  then  present  now  remain,  but  none 
then  present  can  fail  to  recall  the  scene.  The  report  which  Mr. 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  313 

Collamer  read  belongs  to  the  history  of  the  country.  But  the 
scene  comes  clearly  within  the  domain  of  Art.  In  the  long  life 
of  our  departed  friend  it  was  his  brightest  and  most  glorious 
moment, — beyond  anything  of  honor  or  power,  whether  in  the 
cabinet  or  on  the  bench.  For  what  is  office,  compared  to  the 
priceless  opportunity  nobly  employed,  of  standing  as  a  buttress 
for  human  rights." 

The  majority  report  covered  up  the  crimes  of  the  ruffian 
marauders  from  Missouri  and  attributed  all  the  troubles  in 
Kansas  to  the  Free-Soil  settlers  and  especially  to  the  work  of  the 
New  England  Emigrant  Aid  Co.  As  soon  as  the  reports  were 
read  Sumner  took  the  floor  and  briefly  defended  the  company 
saying  that  though  it  sent  emigrants  to  Kansas  it  had  a  right  to 
do  so  and  though  it  hated  slavery,  it  had  a  right  to  do  so,  that 
it  had  offended  no  law  and  been  guilty  of  no  misconduct  and 
that  every  attempt  to  show  otherwise  would  fail. 

Stephen  A.  Douglas  the  author  of  the  majority  report  was 
the  most  difficult  and  disagreeable  opponent  of  the  anti-slavery 
men.  He  was  born  in  Vermont.  A  poor  boy,  of  meager  edu 
cation,  at  the  age  of  twenty  he  had  gone  to  Illinois,  then  the 
extreme  western  frontier.  Almost  penniless,  when  he  landed, 
with  characteristic  energy,  the  same  day  he  clerked  a  sale  to 
acquire  the  means  of  present  support.  With  such  energy  did 
he  enter  upon  his  life,  in  this  new  fleld,  that  at  the  age  of 
twenty-two,  he  was  Attorney-General  of  Illinois,  Secretary  of 
State  at  twenty-seven,  Supreme  Judge  at  twenty-eight,  a  Mem 
ber  of  Congress  at  thirty  and  at  thirty-nine  in  the  TJ.  S.  Senate 
and  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  And  he  continued  to  be  a 
candidate  for  the  Presidency  until  his  death  in  1861,  at  the  age 
of  forty-eight.  His  promotion  was  characteristic  of  the  man. 
Rather  below  medium  height,  but  handsomely  and  compactly 
built,  so  as  to  justify  the  pet  name,,  "  Little  Giant ",  with  which 
his  admirers  dubbed  him,  he  had  a  constitution  that  could  stand 
an  immense  amount  of  hard  work  and  mental  anxiety.  He 
had  great  power  as  a  debater ;  no  one  could  see  a  point  quicker, 
make  more  of  it  for  himself  or  turn  it  against  his  adversary 
more  adroitly  and,  if  the  case  was  against  him,  no  one  could 
muddle  it  more  effectually  so  as  to  obscure  its  real  merit.  He 
was  by  nature  an  orator,  ready  of  utterance,  quick  at  repartee ; 
and  in  that  style  of  speaking,  which  resembles  a  physical 
combat,  he  had  no  equal.  But  at  this  time  of  his  life  he  was  in 
tolerant  of  opposition,  coarse  and  sometimes  insulting  towards 
his  political  adversaries  and  unscrupulous  in  his  methods.  Of 
all  the  "  bullies "  that  defended  slavery  in  Congress,  at  this 
time,  none  deserved  the  title  more  than  Douglas. 


314  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

Anti-slavery  people  of  the  North  found  fault  with  their  Con 
gressmen  because  they  did  not  meet  these  pro-slavery  statesmen 
more  in  their  own  manner.  Nothing  pleased  them  better  than 
the  spirit  of  Joshua  II.  Giddings,  who,  in  answer  to  one  of  their 
blustering  challenges  to  a  duel,  accepted  and  chose  rifles  as 
the  weapons,  at  thirty  paces.  Many  thought  Northern  States 
men  lacking  in  spirit;  and  there  was  a  growing  disposition 
among  anti-slavery  men  in  Congress  to  show  more  light.  As 
pro-slavery  Members  realized  this,  they  grew  more  insolent.  In 
answer  to  Sumner's  comments  on  the  report  of  the  committee, 
Douglas  was  promptly  on  his  feet  to  threaten  the  penalties  of 
treason  against  him  and  the  Free-Soilers  of  Kansas.  In  the 
debate  which  followed  he  pounced  upon  his  Eepublican  col 
league  who  had  only  recently  come  to  the  Senate,  applied  in 
discriminate  epithets  to  him  and  impeached  the  motives  of 
himself  and  the  other  anti-slavery  Senators.  Trumbull  an 
swered  him  savagely  and  closed  by  declaring  that  he  would 
never  permit  him  there  or  elsewhere  to  make  an  assault  upon 
him  without  meeting  it  with  the  best  power  God  had  given  him. 
When  Douglas  turned  again  to  Sumner  to  charge  him  with 
having  gone  to  his  seat  or  spoken  to  him  privately,  during  the 
consideration  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill  to  secure  a  post 
ponement  of  the  debate  that  he  might  gain  time  to  circulate 
a  libel  against  him — the  protest  of  the  Free-Soilers  written  by 
Chase  and  distributed  broadcast — Sumner  denied  that  he  had 
ever  gone  to  his  seat  for  any  such  purpose  and  insisted  that  he 
had  only  exercised  his  right  and  been  governed  by  a  sense  of 
duty  when  he  arose  in  his  place  and  asked  for  delay,  because  he 
desired  it  for  a  proper  discussion  of  that  question.  To  his  as 
persion  that  in  this  he  was  guilty  of  conduct  unworthy  a 
gentleman,  Sumner  replied  that  he  would  leave  it  to  the  Sen 
ate  to  determine  whether  Douglas  was  a  proper  judge  on  such 
a  subject. 

A  week  later  Trumbull  was  attacked  by  Douglas  again.  In 
reiterating  his  insulting  references  to  the  Republicans,  he  in 
sisted  that  they  were  in  favor  of  an  amalgamation  of  the  races 
to  which  Wilson  and  Collamer  replied.  Clay  of  Alabama  and 
Butler  of  South  Carolina  spoke  in  the  same  vein.  In  all  their 
speeches  Massachusetts  and  the  New  England  Aid  Company 
were  special  objects  of  their  spleen  and  the  old  taunt  was  thrown 
at  the  Republican  members  of  fawning  upon  Southern  states 
men  to  procure  social  prestige  and  standing,  in  the  society  of 
the  Capitol. 

Five  days  after  the  reading  of  the  report  by  Douglas,  he  in 
troduced  a  bill  authorizing  the  people  of  Kansas  to  form  a  Con- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  315 

stitution  preparatory  to  their  admission  as  a  State,  when  they 
should  be  found  to  have  the  requisite  population.  Seward  at 
once  offered  a  substitute  providing  for  the  immediate  admission 
of  Kansas  as  a  State  under  the  Constitution  already  formed 
by  the  Topeka  Convention.  This  Constitution  prohibited 
slavery.  But  the  bill  introduced  by  Douglas  provided  for  a 
new  Convention,  he,  of  course,  favoring  a  pro-slavery  Constitu 
tion  or  at  least  an  opportunity  for  such  a  one  to  be  adopted. 
Several  Senators  had  already  spoken  on  these  bills — Douglas, 
Butler,  Clay,  Jones,  Hale  and  Collamer.  Sumner  sought  to 
speak  as  early  as  May  second,  but  did  not  get  the  floor  until 
May  nineteenth. 

Several  of  the  speeches  were  coarsely  personal.  Jones  of  Ten 
nessee  called  Hale,  "the  Devil's  Own."  Clay  said  Hale  was 
ambitious  of  a  kicking/'  Douglas  called  Trumbull  his  col 
league  a  "  traitor  " ;  the  Republicans  with  him  were  uniformly 
"  black  ",  and  the  Free-Soilers  of  Kansas  "  rebels  "  and  "  revo 
lutionists  ".  Benjamin  called  them  "  conspirators  ".  The  Free- 
Soilers  answered  in  the  same  vein.  To  the  assertion  of  Douglas 
that  they  were  in  favor  of  amalgamation,  Wilson  retorted  that 
"  such  emanations  were  usually  coming  from  men  with  the 
odor  of  amalgamation  upon  them"  and  called  him  and  his 
Democratic  colleagues  who  urged  the  passage  of  his  bill 
te  lieutenants  of  Atchison,  the  chieftain  of  the  Border  Ruffian 
Democracy  ". 

For  several  years  Butler  had  been  insulting  in  his  references 
to  Sumner.  In  1854,  he  had  called  Sumner  a  "plunging 
agitator  ",  and  a  "  rhetorical  advocate  ",  and  referred  to  certain 
remarks  he  had  made  in  a  speech  in  the  Senate  as  wanting  in 
"  common  prudence  or  common  delicacy  "  and  to  certain  dis 
tinctions  of  Sumner  as  "  sickly  ",  and  other  remarks  as  "  un 
true  "  and  that  he  was  actuated  by  "  pseudo  philanthropy",  a 
"  philanthropy  that  proposes  much  and  does  nothing  with  a 
long  advertisement  and  a  short  performance ",  as  "  actuated 
by  criminal  ambition  and  heartless  hypocrisy";  called  his 
State,  Massachusetts,  an  "  anti-nigger  State  "  and  declared  that 
"  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  law  in  Massachusetts  abolish 
ing  slavery,  pretty  nearly  all  the  grown  negroes  disappeared 
somewhere ;  and  as  the  historian  expresses  it,  the  little  negroes, 
left  there,  without  father  or  mother,  and  with  hardly  a  God, 
were  sent  about  as  puppies,  to  be  taken  by  those  who  would 
feed  them  ",  when  as  a  matter  of  fact,  slavery  had  not  been  abol 
ished  by  the  passage  of  a  law  in  Massachusetts,  but  by  a  decision 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  whose  announcement  could  not  have  been 
anticipated  so  as  to  permit  the  transportation  of  the  grown 


316  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

slaves.  Six  months  later  Butler  accused  Sumner  of  "  flagrantly 
misrepresenting  history  ",  *  *  *  "  by  vapid  rhetoric  ".  As  late 
as  February  23,  1855,  he  referred  to  Sumner  in  debates  as  a  man 
who  "  did  not  know  half  his  time  exactly  what  he  was  about." 
The  episode  between  himself  and  Sumner,  when  he  asked  Sum 
ner,  if  he  would  return  a  fugitive  slave ;  to  which  Sumner  re 
torted,  "  Is  thy  servant  a  dog  that  he  should  do  this  thing  ",  and 
the  subsequent  perversions  of  Sumner's  answer  to  mean  that  he, 
a  Senator,  sworn  to  do  so,  would  not  obey  the  Constitution  and 
laws  of  the  United  States,  have  already  been  mentioned  and 
need  not  be  repeated.  This  perversion  had  been  tauntingly 
thrown  at  Sumner  with  pettifogging  frequency. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  when  Sumner  on  the  nineteenth  day 
of  May,  1856,  arose  to  speak  on  the  bill,  introduced  by  Douglas, 
and  on  the  substitute  moved  by  Seward,  for  the  admission  of 
Kansas,  as  a  State,  he  was  under  many  provocations  from  his 
opponents.  Much  also  could  be  allowed  for  the  excitement 
prevailing  in  the  country  and  especially  in  Congress  over  the 
troubles  in  Kansas.  Probably  never  in  the  history  of  the 
country  did  political  excitement  run  higher;  for  Southern 
statesmen  had  not  yet  reconciled  themselves  to  schemes  of  se 
cession  and  the  North  had  not  yet  settled  to  the  grim  deter 
mination  to  prevent  disunion.  Both  were  in  the  angry  mood 
for  having  everything  their  own  way.  Sumner  was  firm  in  his 
determination  that  no  more  laurels  should  be  gathered  for 
slavery,  if  he  could  prevent  it.  His  speech,  by  reason  of  the 
importance  of  the  crisis,  in  which  it  represented  the  highest 
j  wave  of  excitement,  and  the  interest  aroused  in  it  by  the  assault 
\  which  followed,  is  the  most  memorable  of  all  Sumner's  produc- 
•  tions.  What  he  said  of  slavery  as  an  institution  was  of  course 
much  the  same  as  what  he  had  already  said  and  need  not  on 
this  account  be  repeated  but  what  he  said  of  the  attempt  now 
made  to  admit  Kansas  as  a  slave  State  and  especially  his 
references  to  Butler  and  Douglas  are  important  in  the  light  of 
what  followed. 

r  After  referring  to  the  wickedness  which  he  hoped  to  expose, 
being  aggravated  by  the  motive  which  prompted  it,  the  desire 
ror  a  new  slave  State,  he  said : 

\  "  Before  entering  upon  the  argument,  I  must  say  something 
of  a  general  character,  particularly  in  response  to  what  has 
fallen  from  Senators  who  have  raised  themselves  to  eminence 
on  this  floor  in  championship  of  human  wrong;  I  mean  the 
Senator  from  South  Carolina  (Butler)  and  the  Senator  from 
Illinois  (Douglas)  who  though  unlike  as  Don  Quixote  and 
Sancho  Panza,  yet  like  this  couple  sally  forth  in  the  same  ad- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  317 

venture.  I  regret  much  to  miss  the  elder  Senator  from  his  seat ; 
but  the  cause  against  which  he  has  run  a  tilt,  with  such  ebulli 
tion  of  animosity,  demands  that  the  opportunity  of  exposing 
him  should  not  be  lost;  and  it  is  for  the  cause  I  speak.  The1 
Senator  from  South  Carolina  has  read  many  books  of  chivalry, 
and  believes  himself  a  chivalrous  knight,  with  sentiments  of 
honor  and  courage.  Of  course  he  has  chosen  a  mistress  to  whom 
he  has  made  his  vows,  and  who,  though  ugly  to  others,  is  always 
lovely  to  him;  though  polluted  in  the  sight  of  the  world,  is 
chaste  in  his  sight:  I  mean  the  harlot  Slavery.  For  her  his 
tongue  is  always  profuse  in  words.  Let  her  be  impeached  in 
character,  or  any  proposition  be  made  to  shut  her  out  from  the 
extension  of  her  wantonness,  and  no  extravagance  of  manner 
or  hardihood  of  assertion  is  then  too  great  for  this  Senator. 
The  frenzy  of  Don  Quixote  in  behalf  of  his  wench  Dulcinea  del 
Toboso  is  all  surpassed.  The  asserted  rights  of  slavery  which 
shock  equality  of  all  kinds,  are  cloaked  by  a  fantastic  claim  of 
equality.  If  the  slave  States  cannot  enjoy  what,  in  mockery  of 
the  great  fathers  of  the  Eepublic,  he  misnames  Equality,  under 
the  Constitution; — in  other  words,  the  full  power  in  the 
National  Territories  to  compel  fellow  men  to  unpaid  toil,  to 
separate  husband  and  wife,  and  to  sell  little  children  at  the 
auction  block, — then,  sir,  the  chivalric  Senator  will  conduct  the 
State  of  South  Carolina  out  of  the  Union!  Heroic  knight! 
Exalted  Senator!  A  second  Moses  come  for  a  second 
exodus  f  *  *  * 

"As  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina  is  the  Don  Quixote, 
so  the  Senator  from  Illinois  (Douglas)  is  the  squire  of  slavery, 
its  very  Sancho  Panza  ready  to  do  its  humiliating  offices.  This 
Senator  in  his  labored  address  vindicating  his  labored  report, — 
piling  one  mass  of  elaborate  error  upon  another  mass, — con 
strained  himself  as  you  will  remember  to  unfamiliar  decencies 
of  speech.  Of  that  address  I  have  nothing  to  say  at  this  mo 
ment,  though  before  I  sit  down  I  shall  show  something  of  its 
fallacies."  *  *  *| 

Sumner  then  spoke;  first,  of  the  crime  against  Kansas; 
second,  of  the  apologies  for  it ;  third,  of  the  remedy  for  it. 

Referring  to  the  Nebraska  Bill  which  had  opened  the  Terri 
tory  to  Slavery  and  enrolled  upon  the  statute  book  the  Douglas 
doctrine  of  "  popular  sovereignty/'  giving  opportunity  for  the 
trouble  that  now  existed,  he  said  that  if  that  bill  had  been 
allowed  to  go  over  to  another  congress,  so  that  the  people  could 
have  been  heard  against  it,  they  would  have  defeated  it.  He 
declared  it  was  a  swindle — a  swindle  on  the  part  of  the  South 
that  had  already  enjoyed  its  share  of  the  Missouri  Compromise; 


318  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

a  swindle  of  those  whose  share  was  yet  untouched;  as  a  bill  of 
peace  it  was  a  swindle  to  the  whole  country ;  it  was  a  swindle  of 
a  Territory  cheated  of  protection  against  slavery.  Sumner  then 
went  over  in  detail  a 'history  of  the  outrages  committed  in 
Kansas,  the  invasion  from  Missouri  to  elect  a  Congressman  in 
November,  1854  and  again  to  elect  a  Legislature  in  March, 
1855,  and  again  to  elect  a  Congressman  in  October,  1855,  the 
invasion  and  threatened  assault  upon  the  town  of  Lawrence, 
the  proclamation  of  Governor  Shannon  calling  for  troops,  an 
swered  only  by  more  companies  of  marauders  from  the  border 
counties  of  Missouri  and  still  another  invasion  from  Missouri  in 
December,  1855,  on  the  occasion  of  voting,  on  a  Constitution 
for  Kansas,  the  Territory  in  a  condition  of  anarchy,  the  citizens 
under  arms,  outrages  committed  sometimes  amounting  to 
murders  and  everything  said  or  done  in  this  vast  circle  of  crime 
radiating  from  one  idea  that  Kansas  must  be  made  a  slave 
State  and  this  to  be  accomplished,  first,  by  outrages  of  all  kinds, 
driving  anti-slavery  people  out  of  the  Territory,  second,  by 
deterring  others  from  coming,  and  third,  by  obtaining  com 
plete  control  of  the  Territorial  government.  He  said  that  while 
the  first  two  purposes  had  failed,  the  third  had  so  far  succeeded. 
He  commented  at  length  on  the  disgraceful  character  of  the 
laws  that  had  been  enacted  to  fasten  slavery  upon  the  Territory. 
He  passed  rapidly  over  the  apologies  which  were  made  for 
these  crimes,  the  idea  that  the  recognition  by  Governor  Eeeder 
of  a  Legislature  elected  by  such  palpable  frauds  could  clothe  it 
with  the  mantle  of  legality,  that  the  President  had  no  power  to 
arrest  such  proceedings,  that  in  justification  of  it  there  existed 
an  oath-bound  secret  society  pledged  to  make  Kansas  a  Free 
State  when  there  was  only  an  honorable  movement  with  this 
end  in  view,  not  in  conflict  with  the  laws  of  the  country.  Much 
effort  had  been  made  by  the  apologists  for  these  outrages,  to 
justify  them  by  attacking  the  Emigrant  Aid  Company  of  New 
England.  This  Sumner  declared  was  infamous.  The  continued 
assaults  upon  this  society  had  led  its  members  to  desire  to  have 
the  false  impression  thus  given  of  its  aims  and  purposes  re 
moved,  by  some  person  of  influence,  who  knew  better  what  it 
was,  than  its  enemies.  Several  gentlemen  prominent  in  its 
organization  and  conduct  had  been  in  correspondence  with 
Sumner  for  some  months.  They  expected  of  him  a  refutation 
of  the  calumnies  that  had  been  uttered  against  them.  He  had 
urged  upon  them  to  lay  aside  the  tone  of  apology,  which  they 
were  so  wont  to  fall  into,  in  speaking  of  the  society  and  plant 
themselves  boldly  on  the  legality  of  the  enterprise.  One  of  the 
managers,  J.  M.  S.  Williams,  came  on  to  Washington  to  talk 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  319 

over  the  subject  with  Sumner,  before  he  spoke,  and  was  present 
at  the  delivery  of  the  speech,  and  Sumner  afterwards  gave  the 
manuscript  of  it  to  him. 

Sumner  said  that  it  had  been  grossly  assailed,  that  it  was  an 
association  of  sincere  benevolence,  faithful  to  law,  whose  only 
fortifications  were  hotels,  school-houses  and  churches,  whose 
only  weapons  were  saw-mills,  tools  and  books,  and  whose  mis 
sion  was  peace  and  good  will,  and  if  he  would  consult  his  own 
feelings  he  would  dismiss  the  attack  that  had  been  made  upon 
it  with  the  ineffable  contempt  it  deserved.  He  declared  that 
men  did  organize  to  rear  churches  and  to  make  pins,  to  build 
schools  and  to  sail  ships,  to  construct  roads  and  to  manufacture 
toys,  to  spin  cotton  and  to  print  books,  to  guard  infancy  in  its 
weakness  and  old  age  in  its  decrepitude  and  womanhood  in  its 
wretchedness;  to  complain  that  this  prevailing  principle  had 
been  applied  to  emigration  was  to  complain  of  Providence  and 
the  irresistible  tendencies  implanted  in  man. 

Sumner  insisted  that  organized  colonization  had  been  en 
couraged  in  Greece  and  Eome,  as  well  as  in  modern  times,  that 
Spain  had  sanctioned  an  association  of  Genoese  merchants  who 
first  introduced  slaves  to  this  continent,  that  France  licensed  the 
Jesuits  who  colonized  the  regions  of  Canada  and  the  Great 
Lakes  and  that  it  was  under  the  auspices  of  Emigrant  Aid  Com 
panies  that  the  Pilgrims  came  to  Plymouth,  the  Adventurers 
to  Virginia  and  Oglethorpe  and  his  companions  to  Georgia, 
and  that  at  the  present  day  similar  associations  were  still  direct 
ing  emigrants  hither.  For  a  long  time  the  tide  of  emigration 
had  steadily  set  from  the  North  to  the  South,  and  especially 
from  New  England  to  the  West,  and  when  it  became  a  question 
whether  the  tempting  fields  of  Kansas  were  to  be  occupied  for 
Freedom  or  for  Slavery,  organization  was  enlisted  to  stimulate 
this  colonization  thither.  The  first  company  for  this  purpose 
had  been  organized  before  the  passage  of  the  Nebraska  Bill. 
But  afterwards  it  had  been  rechartered  and  reorganized  and  it 
then  became  the  mark  for  the  shafts  of  the  enemies  of  Freedom. 

He  said:  "It  is  not  true  that  men  have  been  hired  by  the 
Company  to  go  to  Kansas ;  for  every  emigrant  going  under  its 
direction  himself  provides  the  means  for  his  journey.  Of 
course,  sir,  it  is  not  true,  as  is  complained  by  the  Senator  from 
South  Carolina,  with  that  proclivity  to  error  which  marks  all 
his  utterances,  that  men  have  been  sent  by  the  Company  with 
one  uniform  gun,  Sharpe's  rifle,  for  it  has  supplied  no  arms  of 
any  kind  to  anybody.  It  is  not  true  that  the  Company  has 
encouraged  any  fanatical  aggression  upon  the  people  of  Mis 
souri;  for  it  counsels  order,  peace,  forbearance.  It  is  not  true 


320  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

that  the  Company  has  chosen  its  emigrants  on  account  of 
political  opinions,  for  it  asks  no  question  with  regard  to  the 
opinion  of  any  whom  it  aids  and  at  this  moment  stands  ready 
to  forward  those  from  the  South  as  well  as  the  North.  *  *  * 
It  is  not  true  that  the  Company  has  sent  persons  merely  to  con 
trol  elections  and  not  to  remain  in  the  Territory;  for  its  whole 
action,  and  all  its  anticipation  of  pecuniary  profits  are  founded 
on  the  hope  of  stocking  the  country  with  permanent  settlers.  *  * 

"  Sir,  to  men  on  earth  it  belongs  only  to  deserve  success  not 
to  secure  it ;  and  I  know  not  how  soon  the  efforts  of  Massa 
chusetts  will  wear  the  crown  of  triumph.  But  it  cannot  be  that 
she  acts  wrong  for  herself  or  her  children  when  in  this  cause 
she  encounters  reproach.  *  *  *  What  belongs  to  the  faithful 
servant  she  will  do  in  all  things  and  Providence  shall  determine 
.the  result." 

This  vindication  of  the  Emigrant  Aid  Company  did  not  stop 
the  criticism  of  it  that  had  been  noticeable  in  the  Congressional 
debates.  But  the  information  Sumner  furnished  of  its  plan  of 
work  and  its  purposes,  together  with  the  explanation  of  what 
it  had  already  accomplished,  as  shown  by  the  records  of  the 
society,  showed  how  perfectly  groundless  the  complaints  of 
Southern  statesmen  were  against  it.  The  country  saw  it  was 
pure  declamation  and  the  society  felt  that  it  had  been  suitably 
vindicated. 

At  this  point  in  his  speech,  Sumner  yielded  to  a  motion  to 
adjourn,  having  spoken  three  hours.  He  resumed  his  speech 
the  next  day,  speaking  of  the  remedies  for  the  situation. 

The  recommendation  of  the  President  of  an  increased  ap 
propriation  to  enforce  obedience  to  the  laws,  "  whether  Federal 
or  local,"  he  characterized  as  tyranny,  for  he  insisted  there  were 
no  local  laws  except  those  produced  by  the  usurpation  of  Mis 
souri  hirelings,  who  had  gone  into  the  Territory  and  assumed 
the  place  of  citizens. 

He  was  no  less  unsparing  in  his  criticism  of  what  he  denom 
inated  the  remedy  of  folly. 

"  It  comes,"  he  said,  "  from  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina 
(Butler),  who  at  the  close  of  a  long  speech,  offered  it  as  his 
single  contribution  to  the  adjustment  of  this  question  and  who 
thus  far  stands  alone  in  its  support.  It  might,  therefore,  fitly 
bear  his  name,  but  that  which  I  now  give  to  it  is  a  more  sug 
gestive  synonym." 

"  This  proposition  nakedly  expressed,  is,  that  the  people  of 
Kansas  should  be  deprived  of  their  arms."  *  *  * 

"Really,  sir,  has  it  come  to  this?  The  rifle  has  ever  been 
the  companion  of  the  pioneer,  and,  under  God,  his  tutelary 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  321 

protector  against  the  red  man  and  the  beast  of  the  forest. 
Never  was  this  efficient  weapon  more  needed  in  self  defence  than 
in  Kansas ;  and  at  least  one  article  of  our  National  Constitution 
must  be  blotted  out  before  the  complete  right  to  it  can  be  in 
any  way  impeached.  And  yet  such  is  the  madness  of  the  hour, 
that  in  defiance  of  the  solemn  guarantee  in  the  Amendments  to 
the  Constitution,  that  '  the  right  of  the  people  to  keep  and  bear 
arms  shall  not  be  infringed/  the  people  of  Kansas  are  arraigned 
for  keeping  and  bearing  arms  and  the  Senator  from  South 
Carolina  has  the  face  to  say  openly  on  this  floor  that  they  should 
be  disarmed — of  course  that  the  fanatics  of  slavery,  his  allies 
and  constituents,  may  meet  no  impediment.  Sir,  the  Senator 
is  venerable  with  years ;  he  is  reputed  to  have  also  worn  at  home, 
in  the  State  he  represents,  judicial  honors,  and  he  is  placed  here 
at  the  head  of  an  important  Committee  occupied  particularly 
with  questions  of  law;  but  neither  his  years,  nor  his  position 
past  or  present,  can  give  respectability  to  the  demand  he  makes 
or  save  him  from  indignant  condemnation,  when  to  compass  the 
wretched  purpose  of  a  wretched  cause  he  thus  proposes  to 
trample  on  one  of  the  plainest  provisions  of  Constitutional 
Liberty/' 

Senator  Douglas  had  proposed  a  third  remedy,  to  authorize 
the  Legislature,  as  soon  as  a  census  taken  by  its  authority  and 
the  Governor's,  disclosed  a  sufficient  population  to  constitute  a 
Congressional  District,  to  provide  by  law  for  calling  a  conven 
tion  to  form  a  constitution  and  apply  for  admission  as  a  State. 
This,  Sumner  said,  meant  injustice  and  civil  war.  It  provided 
for  maintaining  indefinitely  the  same  state  of  anarchy  that 
then  prevailed.  It  placed  the  control  of  the  whole  matter  in  the 
usurping  legislature  that  then  existed  and  others  to  be  elected, 
under  the  laws  that  it  had  passed,  depriving  of  citizenship,  on 
the  one  hand,  all  the  friends  of  Freedom,  who  would  not  swear 
to  support  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  and  on  the  other  hand  cloth 
ing  with  the  right  to  vote  all  others  who  presented  themselves 
with  a  fee  of  one  dollar  whether  from  Missouri  or  not. 

But  as  the  true  remedy,  Sumner  urged  the  prompt  passage  of 
the  bill,  moved  by  Seward  as  the  substitute  for  that  of  Douglas, 
and  providing  for  the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  as  a 
State.  This  he  urged,  as  a  remedy  for  the  existing  troubles, 
and  the  only  protection  they  could  hope  for  against  other  and 
greater  ones  that  threatened.  He  urged  it  as  a  measure  of 
justice  to  the  people  who  ought  to  have  a  right  to  create  their 
own  government  for  themselves.  He  insisted  that  in  admitting 
them,  with  the  Constitution  they  had  already  formed  for  them 
selves,  they  only  followed  the  precedent  established  in  the  ad- 


322  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

mission  of  Michigan  and  that  to  require  them  to  have  such  a 
population.,  as  the  bill  proposed  by  Douglas  provided  for,  was 
to  place  a  condition  upon  Kansas  that  only  three  States  ful 
filled,  while  fifteen  others  had  fallen  short,  which  three  States 
with  Senators  then  on  the  floor  did  not  fulfil  and  which  three 
colonies  at  the  formation  of  the  Union  could  not  meet,  viz., 
have  a  population  of  93,000.  Such  a  requisition  laid  upon 
Kansas  was  unjust,  especially  in  view  of  conditions  then  exist 
ing  in  the  Territory.  She  did  then  have  a  population,  as  he 
estimated,  of  from  50,000  to  60,000,  and  eight  States  had  been 
admitted  whose  population  did  not  equal  60,000.  So  that  there 
was  no  reason  which  could  be  drawn  from  precedent  or  from 
justice  to  forbid  the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  with 
the  Constitution  she  had  already  formed  for  herself. 

Sumner  spoke  feelingly  of  the  attitude  that  had  been  main 
tained  by  the  Administration  towards  Kansas.  Referring  to 
the  period  of  the  American  Revolution  and  our  struggles  with 
the  Mother  Country,  he  affirmed  that  there  was  hardly  a  com 
plaint  contained  in  the  enumeration  in  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  against  the  King  of  Great  Britain  that  could  not 
be  urged  with  as  much  justice  by  the  people  of  Kansas  against 
the  President.  He  had  "  sent  swarms  of  officers  to  harrass  their 
people/'  he  <e  had  combined  with  others  to  subject  them  * 
and  given  his  assent  to  acts  of  pretended  legislation  " ;  he  "  had 
waged  war  against  them,"  "  excited  domestic  insurrection,"  and 
"  to  their  repeated  petitions  had  answered  only  by  repeated 
injury."  And,  as  the  tyranny  of  the  King  had  been  renewed 
in  the  President,  so  Sumner  urged,  upon  the  floor  of  the  Senate 
had  been  renewed  the  butt  of  sorry  jest  and  supercilious  as 
sumption  against  the  petitions  of  Kansas  that  had  met  the 
prayers  of  our  fathers  to  the  British  Parliament. 

"  With  regret,"  here  he  said,  "  I  come  again  upon  the  Senator 
from  South  Carolina  (Butler)  who  omnipresent  in  this  debate, 
overflows  with  rage  at  the  simple  suggestion  that  Kansas  has 
applied  for  admission  as  a  State,  and  with  incoherent  phrase, 
discharges  the  loose  expectoration  of  his  speech  now  upon  her 
Representative  and  then  upon  her  people.  There  was  no  ex 
travagance  of  the  ancient  Parliamentary  debate  which  he  did 
not  repeat ;  nor  was  there  any  possible  deviation'  from  truth 
which  he  did  not  make  with  so  much  of  passion,  I  gladly  add, 
as  to  save  him  from  the  suspicion  of  intentional  aberration. 
But  the  Senator  touches  nothing  which  he  does  not  disfigure, 
—with  error  sometimes  of  principle,  sometimes  of  fact.  He 
shows  an  incapacity  of  accuracy  in  stating  the  Constitution  or 
in  stating  the  law,  whether  in  'detail  of  statistics  or  diversions 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  323 

of  scholarship.  He  cannot  ope  his  mouth  but  out  there  flies 
a  blunder.  Surely  he  ought  to  be  familiar  with  the  life  of 
Franklin,  and  yet  he  refers  to  this  household  character,  while 
acting  as  the  agent  of  our  fathers  in  England,  as  not  above 
suspicion:  and  this  was  done  that  he  might  give  point  to  a 
false  contrast  with  the  agent  of  Kansas, — not  knowing  that, 
however  the  two  may  differ  in  genius  and  fame,  they  are 
absolutely  alike  in  this  experience,  that  Franklin  when  en 
trusted  with  the  petition  from  Massachusetts  Bay,  was  assaulted 
by  a  foul-mouthed  speaker  where  he  could  not  be  heard  in  de 
fence,  and  denounced  as  '  thief '  even  as  the  agent  of  Kansas  is 
assaulted  on  this  floor  and  denounced  as  '  forger.'  And  let 
not  the  vanity  of  the  Senator  be  inspired  by  the  parallel  with 
the  British  Statesman  of  that  day ;  for  it  is  only  in  hostility  to 
Freedom  that  any  parallel  can  be  found/' 

"  But  it  is  against  the  people  of  Kansas  that  the  sensibilities  of 
the  Senator  are  particularly  aroused.  Coming  as  he  announces 
'  from  a  State/ — aye,  Sir,  from  South  Carolina — he  turns  with 
lordly  disgust  from  this  newly  formed  community,  which  he 
will  not  -recognize  even  as  ( a  member  of  the  body  politic.'  Pray, 
Sir,  by  what  title  does  he  indulge  in  this  egotism?  Has  he  ( 
read  the  history  of  the  '  State '  which  he  represents  ?  He  can-  j 
not  surely  forget  its  imbecility  from  slavery,  confessed  through-  ' 
out  the  Revolution,  followed  by  its  more  shameful  assumption 
for  slavery  since.  He  cannot  forget  its  wretched  persistence  in 
the  slave  trade,  as  the  very  apple  of  its  eye,  and  the  condition 
of  its  participation  in  the  Union.  He  cannot  forget  its  Con 
stitution  which  is  republican  only  in  name,  confirming  power  in 
the  hands  of  the  few,  and  founding  the  qualification  of  its 
legislators  on  '  a  settled  freehold  estate  of  five  hundred  acres  of 
land  and  ten  negroes.'  And  yet  the  Senator  to  whom  this 
'  State '  has  in  part  committed  the  guardianship  of  its  good 
name,  instead  of  moving  with  backward  treading  steps  to  cover  j 
its  nakedness,  rushes  forward  in  the  very  ecstacy  of  madness  | 
to  expose  it,  by  provoking  comparison  with  Kansas.  South 
Carolina  is  old;  Kansas  is  young.  South  Carolina  counts  by 
centuries,  when  Kansas  counts  by  years.  But  a  beneficent 
example  may  be  born  in  a  day ;  and  I  venture  to  declare,  that 
against  the  two  centuries  of  the  older  '  State '  may  be  set  al 
ready  the  two  years  of  trial,  evolving  corresponding  virtue,  in 
the  younger  community.  In  the  one  is  the  long  wail  of  Slavery ; 
in  the  other,  the  hymn  of  Freedom.  And  if  we  glance  at  special 
achievement,  it  will  be  difficult  to  find  anything  in  the  history 
of  South  Carolina  which  presents  so  much  of  heroic  spirit,  in 
an  heroic  cause  as  shines  in  that  repulse  of  the  Missouri  in- 


324  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

vaders  by  the  beleaguered  town  of  Lawrence,  where  even  the 
women  gave  their  effective  efforts  to  Freedom.  The  matrons 
of  Rome  who  poured  their  jewels  into  the  treasury  for  the 
public  defence,  the  wives  of  Prussia  who  with  delicate  fingers 
clothed  their  defenders  against  the  French  invasion,  the  mothers 
of  our  own  Revolution  who  sent  forth  their  sons  covered  with 
prayers  and  blessings  to  combat  for  human  rights  did  nothing 
of  self  sacrifice  truer  than  did  these  women  on  this  occasion. 
Were  the  whole  history  of  South  Carolina  blotted  out  of  ex 
istence  from  its  very  beginning  down  to  the  day  of  the  last 
election  of  the  Senator  to  his  present  seat  on  this  floor,  civiliza 
tion  might  lose — I  do  not  say  how  little,  but  surely  less  than 
it  has  already  gained  by  the  example  of  Kansas,  in  that  valiant 
struggle  against  oppression,  and  in  the  development  of  a  new 
science  of  emigration.  Already  in  Lawrence  alone  are  news 
papers  and  schools, — and  throughout  this  infant  Territory  there 
is  more  of  educated  talent,  in  proportion  to  its  inhabitants, 
than  in  his  vaunted  '  State/  Ah,  Sir,  I  tell  the  Senator  that 
Kansas,  welcomed  as  a  Free  State,  '  a  ministering  angel  shall 
be '  to  the  Republic,  when  South  Carolina,  in  the  cloak  of  dark 
ness  which  she  hugs, f lies  howling/  " 

"  The  Senator  from  Illinois  (Douglas)  naturally  joins  the 
Senator  from  South  Carolina,  and  gives  to  this  warfare  the 
superior  intensity  of  his  nature.  He  thinks  that  the  National 
Government  has  not  completely  proved  its  power,  as  it  has  never 
hanged  a  traitor, — but  if  occasion  requires,  he  hopes  there  will 
be  no  hesitation,  and  this  threat  is  directed  at  Kansas  and  even 
at  the  friends  of  Kansas  throughout  the  country.  Again  occurs 
a  parallel  with  the  struggles  of  our  fathers ;  and  I  borrow  the 
language  of  Patrick  Henry  when  to  the  cry  of  the  Senator  of 
f  Treason  !  Treason ! '  I  reply,  '  If  this  be  treason  make  the 
most  of  it/  Sir,  it  is  easy  to  call  names ;  but  I  beg  to  tell  the 
Senator,  that  if  the  word  '  traitor '  is  in  any  way  applicable  to 
those  who  reject  a  tyrannical  usurpation  whether  in  Kansas  or 
elsewhere  then  must  some  new  word  of  deeper  color  be  invented 
to  designate  those  mad  spirits  who  would  endanger  and  degrade 
the  Republic,  while  they  betray  all  the  cherished  sentiments  of 
the  Fathers  and  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution,  that  slavery  may 
have  new  spread.  Let  the  Senator  proceed.  Not  the  first 
time  in  history  will  a  scaffold  become  the  pedestal  of  honor. 
Out  of  death  comes  life  and  the  traitor  whom  he  blindly  exe 
cutes  will  live  immortal  in  the  cause/' 

"  Among  these  hostile  senators  is  yet  another,  with  all  the 
prejudice  of  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina,  but  without  his 
generous  impulses  who  from  his  character  before  the  country, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  325 

and  the  rancor  of  his  opposition,  deserves  to  be  so  named:  I 
mean  the  Senator  from  Virginia  (Mason)  who  as  author  of 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  has  associated  himself  with  a  special 
act  of  inhumanity  and  tyranny.  Of  him  I  shall  say  little,  for 
he  has  said  little  in  this  debate,  though  within  that  little  he  has 
compressed  the  bitterness  of  a  life  absorbed  in  support  of 
Slavery.  He  holds  the  commission  of  Virginia,  but  he  does 
not  represent  that  early  Virginia,  so  dear  to  our  hearts  which 
gave  us  the  pen  of  Jefferson,  by  which  the  equality  of  men  was 
declared,  and  the  sword  of  Washington  by  which  Independence 
was  secured;  he  represents  that  other  Virginia,  from  which 
Washington  and  Jefferson  avert  their  faces,  where  human  beings 
are  bred  as  cattle  for  the  shambles,  and  a  dungeon  rewards  the 
pious  matron  who  teaches  little  children  to  relieve  their  bond 
age  by  reading  the  Book  of  Life.  It  is  proper  that  such  a 
Senator  representing  such  a  State,  should  rail  against  Free 
Kansas." 

<e  Such  as  these  are  natural  enemies  of  Kansas  and  I  intro-     \ 
duce  them  with  reluctance,  simply  that  the  country  may  un 
derstand  the  character  of  the  hostility  to  be  overcome." 

Such  as  these  he  said  were  the  powers  necessary  to  be  over 
come  to  bring  Freedom  to  Kansas.  This  was  the  duty  that  was 
now  laid  upon  Congress;  and  to  be  accomplished,  it  must  lay 
aside  all  machinations  of  candidates  and  party  politics  and 
turning  from  the  slave  oligarchy  so  long  in  control  of  the  Re 
public  dedicate  itself  to  this  great  work.  Except  for  slavery  it 
would  not  dare  to  refuse  this  act  of  justice,  law  and  order.  But « 
the  slave  power  dared  anything ;  and  it  could  be  conquered  only  I 
by  the  united  masses  of  the  People.  To  them,  therefore,  he  ap 
pealed.  Already  public  opinion  was  gathering  and  the  indig 
nant  utterance  was  finding  expression  through  the  press,  and  in 
daily  conversation,  wherever  men  met.  Against  every  man, 
whether  in  office  or  out  of  it,  whose  hand  had  been  set  to  the  re 
moval  of  the  ancient  Landmark  of  Freedom,  the  imprecation  of 
the  People  would  be  laid.  They  would  unite  once  more  with  the 
Fathers  of  the  Republic  in  just  condemnation  of  Slavery.  For 
this,  Kansas  stood  forth  patiently  waiting,  but  with  no  uncer 
tain  issue.  She  offered  herself  for  admission  to  the  Union  but 
only  as  a  Free  State. 

In  conclusion  he  pointed  out  that  the  contest  beginning  in 
Kansas,  would  soon  be  transferred  from  Congress  to  the  people 
about  to  vote  for  a  Chief  Magistrate  of  the  Republic.  And  he 
appealed  to  the  ballot-box  of  the  Union  to  protect  the  ballot- 
box  of  Kansas  and  the  voters,  while  rejoicing  in  their  own  rights 


«ioo  LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

o/ 

everywhere,  to  help  guard  the  equal  rights  of  their  distant 
fellow  citizens. 

He  closed  near  three  p.  M.  having  spoken  altogether  five 
hours.  And  soon  as  he  was  seated  the  effect  of  his  speech  was 
apparent.  Cass  was  the  first  on  his  feet  to  reply.  He  had  heard 
it  he  said  "  with  equal  regret  and  surprise  " — a  speech  "  the 
most  un-American  and  unpatriotic  that  ever  grated  on  the 
ears  of  the  members  of  this  high  body."  Douglas  followed, 
coarse  in  personalities.  "  He  seems  to  get  up  a  speech  as  in 
Yankee-land  they  get  up  a  bed-quilt  *  *  *  made  of  old  calico 
dresses  of  various  colors ;  "  growing  virtuous,  "  We  have  another 
dish  of  the  classics  served  up — classic  allusions,  each  one  only 
distinguished  for  its  lasciviousness  and  obscenity, — each  one 
drawn  from  those  portions  of  the  classics  which  all  decent  pro 
fessors  in  respectable  colleges  cause  to  be  suppressed  as  unfit  for 
decent  young  men  to  read.  Sir,  I  cannot  repeat  the  words.  I 
should  be  condemned  as  unworthy  of  entering  decent  society,  if 
I  repeated  those  obscene,  vulgar  terms  which  have  been  used  at 
least  a  hundred  times  in  that  speech."  Again,  "  The  senator 
from  Massachusetts  had  his  speech  written,  printed,  committed 
to  memory,  practised  every  night  before  the  glass  with  a  negro 
boy  to  hold  the  candle  and  watch  the  gestures,  and  annoying  the 
boarders  in  the  adjoining  rooms  until  they  were  forced  to  quit 
the  house."  Mason  followed  :  "  I  am  constrained  to  hear  here 
depravity,  vice,  in  its  most  odious  form,  uncoiled  in  this  pre 
sence,  exhibiting  its  loathsome  deformities  in  accusation  and 
vilification  against  the  quarter  of  the  country  from  which  I 
come ;  and  I  must  listen  to  it  because  it  is  a  necessity  of  my  posi 
tion,  under  a  common  government,  to  recognize  as  an  equal 
politically  one  whom  to  see  elsewhere  is  to  shun  and  despise." 

The  "  classic  allusions  "  and  "  vilification  "  to  which  the  ref 
erences  are  made  have  been  quoted  and  the  reader  can  see 
for  himself  what  foundation  there  was  for  these  thrusts.  It 
was  not  unusual  for  Southerners  by  laughing  and  talking  in  an 
undertone  among  themselves,  making  trifling  allusions  to  what 
was  said  and  in  such  ways  to  annoy  an  anti-slavery  speaker. 
Sumner  experienced  this  while  speaking  and  he  had  asked  the 
sergeant  at  arms  to  preserve  order,  when  he  was  in  turn  called 
to  order  by  them  for  not  addressing  his  request  to  the  presid 
ing  officer.  When  Mason  closed,  Sumner's  patience  was  ex 
hausted  and  he  was  on  his  feet  again. 

Eeminded  of  the  friendly  relations  that  had  existed  between 
himself  and  Cass  both  in  Europe  and  America,  he  declined  to 
enter  into  a  controversy  with  him,  regretting  that  Cass  had  so 
far  forgotten  them  as  to  meet  his  argument  with  abuse. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  327 

He  said ;  "  Mr.  President, — Three  Senators  have  spoken ; 
one  venerable  in  years  with  whom  I  have  had  associations  of 
personal  regard  longer  than  with  anybody  now  within  the 
sound  of  my  voice,  the  Senator  from  Michigan;  another  the 
Senator  from  Illinois  and  a  third  the  Senator  from  Vir 
ginia." 

"  To  the  Senator  from  Illinois  I  should  willingly  yield  the 
privilege  of  the  common  scold, — the  last  word;  but  I  will  not 
yield  to  him  in  any  discussion  with  me,  the  last  argument  or 
the  last  semblance  of  it.  He  has  crowned  the  outrage  of  this 
debate  by  venturing  to  rise  here  and  calumniate  me.  He  has 
said  that  I  came  here,  took  an  oath  to  support  the  Constitution, 
and  yet  determined  not  to  support  a  particular  clause  in  that 
Constitution.  To  this  statement  I  give  to  his  face  the  flattest 
denial.  When  it  was  made  previously  on  this  floor  by  the  absent 
Senator  from  South  Carolina,  I  then  repelled  it."  *  *  * 

"  Sir,  this  is  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  an  important 
body  under  the  Constitution,  with  great  powers.  Its  members 
are  justly  supposed,  from  years,  to  be  above  the  intemperance  of 
youth,  and  from  character  to  be  above  the  gusts  of  vulgarity. 
They  are  supposed  to  have  something  of  wisdom  and  something 
of  that  candor  which  is  the  handmaid  of  wisdom.  Let  the 
Senator  bear  these  things  in  mind  and  remember  hereafter  that 
the  bowie-knife  and  bludgeon  are  not  proper  emblems  of  sena 
torial  debate.  Let  him  remember  that  the  swagger  of  Bob 
Acres  and  the  ferocity  of  the  Malay  cannot  add  dignity  to  this 
body.  The  Senator  infused  into  his  speech  the  venom  swel 
tering  for  months, — aye  for  years;  and  he  has  alleged  matters 
entirely  without  foundation,  in  order  to  heap  upon  me  some 
personal  obloquy.  I  will  not  descend  to  things  which  dropped 
so  naturally  from  his  tongue.  I  only  brand  them  to  his  face  as 
false.  I  say  also  to  that  Senator,  and  I  wish  him  to  bear  it  in 
mind,  that  no  person  with  the  upright  form  of  man  can  be  al 
lowed—"  (hesitating) 

Douglas.     "  Say  it." 

Sumner.  "  I  will  say  it, — no  person  with  the  upright  form 
of  man  can  be  allowed,  without  violation  of  all  decency  to  switch 
out  from  his  tongue  the  perpetual  stench  of  offensive  person 
ality.  Sir,  that  is  not  a  proper  weapon  of  debate,  at  least  on 
this  floor.  The  noisome  squat,  and  the  nameless  animal  to 
which  I  now  refer  is  not  the  proper  model  for  an  American 
Senator.  Will  the  Senator  from  Illinois  take  notice?" 

Douglas.    "  I  will — and  therefore  will  not  imitate  you,  Sir." 

Sumner.    <e  I  did  not  hear  the  Senator." 

Douglas.    "  I  said  if  that  be  the  case,  I  would  certainly  never 


328  LWE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

imitate  you,  in  that  capacity, — recognizing  the  form  of  the  illus 
tration." 

Sumner.  "  Mr.  President,  again  the  Senator  switches  his 
tongue  and  again  he  fills  the  Senate  with  its  offensive  odor. 
But  I  drop  the  Senator/' 

.  "  There  was  still  another,  the  Senator  from  Virginia,  who  is 
now  also  in  my  eye.  That  Senator  said  nothing  of  argument 
and  therefore  there  is  nothing  of  that  to  be  answered.  I  simply 
say  to  him  that  hard  words  are  not  argument,  frowns  are  not 
reasons  nor  do  scowls  belong  to  the  proper  arsenal  of  parlia 
mentary  debate.  The  Senator  has  not  forgotten  that  on  a 
former  occasion  I  did  something  to  exhibit  the  plantation 
manners  which  he  displays.  I  will  not  do  any  more  now/' 

From  these  personal  parts  of  Sumner's  speech,  and  they 
have  all  been  given,  the  reader  can  judge  whether  there  was  any 
thing  said  of  Butler  and  South  Carolina  or  even  of  Douglas  and 
Mason  that  would  justify  the  assault  that  was  soon  after  made 
on  Sumner  by  Preston  S.  Brooks  of  South  Carolina.  He 
claimed  that  the  words  quoted  were  a  libel  upon  Butler  and 
South  Carolina.  Having  the  language  before  him  the  reader 
can  judge  of  this  question  for  himself. 

The  speech,  however,  has  a  merit,  independent  of  this  cir 
cumstance.  It  was  one  of  the  greatest  efforts  of  Sumner's 
life  and  it  was  a  large  influence  in  the  election  which  followed, 
and  so  among  the  factors  in  the  destruction  of  slavery. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

THE  ASSAULT  UPON  SUMNER  BY  PRESTON  S.  BROOKS — ACTION  OF 
CONGRESS — RESIGNATION    AND    RE-ELECTION    OF    BROOKS — 

APPROVAL  OF  THE  ACT  BY  THE   SOUTH FEELING   AROUSED 

BY    IT    IN    THE    NORTH DEATHS    OF    BROOKS,    KEITT    AND 

BUTLER 

BY  the  speeches  Sumner  had  made  against  slavery  he  had  in 
curred  the  settled  displeasure  of  the  Southern  men  in  Congress. 
He  was  the  most  fearless  and  outspoken  of  the  Free-Soilers. 
His  speeches  were  carefully  prepared,  attractive  and  widely  cir 
culated  and  read.  When  delivered  in  the  Senate,  by  reason  of 
the  exhaustive  treatment  of  the  subject  they  might  seem  cumber 
some  but  not  so  to  intelligent  readers  by  the  fireside  at  home. 
They  were  peculiarly  effective  in  arousing  public  sentiment. 
Naturally  at  this  latest  protest  against  the  extension  of  slavery 
the  Southern  Members  felt  resentment;  and  the  bitterness  they 
freely  expressed  not  unnaturally  found  a  disordered  mind  to 
give  it  effect. 

John  A.  Bingham,  a  Representative  of  Ohio,  who  had  heard 
the  speech  and  seeing,  in  the  faces  of  the  Southerners,  the  dis 
pleasure  with  which  it  was  received,  warned  Sumner  of  the 
danger  of  personal  injury  he  was  encountering.  His  colleague 
Wilson  and  Representatives  Schuyler  Colfax  and  Anson  G. 
Burlingame,  sharing  the  same  feeling  of  apprehension,  at  the 
close  of  the  session,  proposed  to  accompany  him  home.  But 
Sumner  always  slow  to  believe  harm  of  others,  laughingly  put 
aside  their  fears  and  quietly  slipped  away  by  himself.  Subse 
quent  events,  however,  showed  that  they  were  right  in  their 
apprehension  for  his  safety.  A  plot  to  waylay  him  on  his 
way  to  the  Capitol  on  the  'two  succeeding  days  failed  of  exe 
cution  only  by  reason  of  his  taking  unaccustomed  routes.  But 
the  miscarriage  of  their  plots  only  delayed  the  execution  of  the 
purpose. 

Preston  S.  Brooks  the  assailant  was  a  Representative  of 
South  Carolina.  He  was  an  attorney  by  profession  and  the  son 
cf  an  attorney.  He  came  from  an  obscure  District  in  the 
western  part  of  the  State,  living  in  the  little  village  of  Ninety- 
six  in  the  midst  of  a  region  of  rich  plantations,  where  to  this 
day  the  current  of  the  world's  vigorous  life  seldom  reaches.  He 

329 


330  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

was  a  very  large,  powerfully  built  man,  more  than  six  feet  in 
height,  somewhat  slovenly  in  his  dress,  wearing  his  clothes 
large  and  hanging  loosely  about  his  spare  frame,  the  collar 
of  his  shirt  carelessly  rolled  and  held  in  place  by  a  four-in-hand 
tie  dangling  on  his  bosom,  his  hair  long  after  the  manner  of 
Southerners  of  that  day.  He  was  retiring  in  his  disposition, 
having  few  intimates  and  taking  little  part  in  the  proceedings 
of  the  House.  In  fact  the  one  act  in  his  Congressional  career 
that  rescues  his  name  "from  oblivion  is  the  brutal  assault  he 
made  on  Sumner.  Except  for  this,  he  would  not  be  remem 
bered  outside  of  his  District  and  hardly  there.  Sumner  did 
not  know  him  at  all  and,  therefore,,  private  considerations  could 
|  have  had  nothing  to  do  with  his  conduct.  He  was  distantly 
j  connected  with  Senator  Butler,  his  father  having  been  Butler's 
;  cousin  and  so  he  claimed  the  right  to  avenge  an  alleged  libel 
upon  him  and  his  State,  contained  in  Simmer's  speech.  Brooks 
represented  the  extreme  passion  and  prejudice  of  the  South, 
whose  feeling  against  Sumner  had  been  provoked  to  violence  by 
his  persistent  and  telling  agitation  against  Slavery.  His  con 
federates  were  Representatives  Iveitt  of  South  Carolina  and 
Edmundson  of  Virginia. 

•*  The  testimony  of  what  occurred  was  taken  under  oath  by  a 
Congressional  Committee.  It  thus  appeared  that  Bingham,  who 
had  warned  Sumner  at  the  close  of  the  session  of  Tuesday,  had 
no  ground  for  his  apprehensions,  but  his  own  conclusions  drawn 
from  the  looks  and  conduct  of  Southern  Members  and  their 
friends  and  the  expressions  of  Douglas  and  Mason  during  the 
debate.  Brooks  had  been  a  listener  to  Sumner's  speech  on  the 
first  day,  but  had  not  heard  the  part  delivered  on  the  second, 
though  he  had  heard  it  discussed  by  Southern  men  and  women, 
at  hotels  and  in  the  lobbies  of  the  Capitol  and  thus  received  ex 
aggerated  reports  of  what  had  been  said,  in  his  absence.  He  had 
not  read  any  of  it,  though  while  making  the  assault  he  said  he 
had.  His  mind  was  inflamed  with  the  thought  that  he  would 
be  doing  his  section  a  service  by  assaulting  and  punishing 
Sumner  for  the  words  he  had  spoken. 

He  lay  in  wait  for  Sumner  for  an  hour  or  more  at  the  Penn 
sylvania  Avenue  approach  to  the  Capitol  before  the  opening  of 
the  Senate  on  the  day  succeeding  the  speech,  but  Sumner  had 
gone  in  by  another  way  and  he  missed  him.  There  he  met 
Edmundson  and  they  talked  of  his  purpose  and  together  they 
waited  till  the  lateness  of  the  hour  persuaded  them  that  their 
longer  stay  would  be  in  vain.  They  met  again  there  at  the  same 
hour  on  the  next  day  and  again  they  waited,  but  Sumner  had 
gone  earlier  to  the  Senate  and  they  were  again  disappointed. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  331 

ferooks  told  Edmundson  that  he  would  attack  Sumner  there  if 
he  walked  to  the  Capitol,  but  if  he  drove  he  would  hurry  up  the 
steps  and  meet  him,  in  the  Rotunda,  or  on  the  other  side  of  the 
Capitol,  where  the  carriages  were  accustomed  to  stop.  But  Ed 
mundson,  nicely  calculating  the  chances  of  this  knightly  en 
counter  thus  planned,  reminded  him  that  the  labor  of  ascending 
the  steps  to  reach  the  proposed  place  of  attack  would  necessarily 
exhaust  him  and  unfit  him  for  the  assault;  and  that  plan  was 
accordingly  abandoned.  So  the  two  went  into  the  Capitol  to 
gether,  parting  in  the  Rotunda,  Edmundson  going  to  the  House 
and  Brooks  to  the  Senate. 

The  Senate  remained  in  session  but  a  few  minutes  to  hear 
the  eulogy  of  Senator  Geyer  of  Missouri  on  the  death  of  Repre 
sentative  Miller  of  the  same  State,  when  out  of  respect  for  the 
deceased,  it  adjourned  at  12.45  p.  M.,  the  House  having 
adjourned  fifteen  minutes  earlier.  Sumner  after  the  adjourn 
ment  of  the  Senate,  remained  in  his  seat  writing.  To  several 
persons  who  came  to  him  he  excused  himself  with  the  state 
ment  that  he  wished  to  complete  some  work  for  a  mail  that  was 
about  closing.  He  sat  close  up  to  his  desk  with  his  feet  and 
legs  well  under  it.  Being  a  large  man  and  the  desk  small 
for  him,  he  could  not  rise  without  first  pushing  his  chair  back 
so  as  to  release  his  legs.  His  head  was  well  down  over  the  desk 
intent  on  the  work  before  him  and  he  did  not  see  what  was 
passing  about  him. 

Brooks  reached  the  Senate  before  its  adjournment  and  stood 
leaning  against  the  side  of  the  entrance  to  the  main-aisle  not 
more  than  twenty  feet  from  Sumner's  chair  and  behind  him. 
When  the  Senate  adjourned,  the  most  of  the  Senators  passed 
out.  Brooks  then  entered  the  Chamber  and  seated  himself 
across  the  aisle,  but  nearer  Sumner.  Seeing  a  lady  present,  he 
asked  an  officer  of  the  Senate  to  get  her  out,  but  the  officer  see 
ing  no  reason  for  doing  so,  declined.  Brooks  then  went  out  of 
the  Chamber  to  Edmundson  and  proposed  that  he  should  send 
in  for  Sumner  to  come  out,  but  Edmundson  suggested  that 
Sumner  would  probably  only  send  for  Brooks  to  come  in  and 
so  interfere  with  his  other  plans.  Brooks  therefore  returned 
to  the  Chamber.  Edmundson  remained  at  the  entrance  while 
Keitt  stood  waiting  behind  the  Vice-President's  chair. 

Brooks  passed  directly  to  Sumner's  chair.  Sumner  did  not 
notice  his  presence  till  he  heard  some  one  call  his  name,  when 
looking  up  he  caught  the  words ;  "  I  have  read  your  speech  over 
twice  carefully ;  it  is  a  libel  on  South  Carolina  and  Mr.  Butler 
who  is  a  relative  of  mine  " — and  while  he  was  still  speaking  and 
apparently  without  finishing  the  sentence,  the  tall  powerfully 


332  LIFE   OF  CHARLES    SUMNER 

built  stranger  raised  a  heavy  cane  and  struck  him  with  all  his 
force  over  the  head.  Sumner  threw  up  his  arms  and  endeavored 
to  protect  himself  but  the  first  blow  blinded  him  and  Brook;, 
continued  to  rain  blow  after  blow  upon  his  head  as  hard  and 
as  fast  as  he  could,  wounding  also  Sumner's  arms  and  his 
hands. 

Sumner  was  pinioned  down,  with  the  desk  fastened  to  the 
floor  and  his  chair,  holding  his  legs  so  that  he  was  completely 
at  the  mercy  of  his  assailant.  He  was  entirely  unarmed,  and 
besides  had  no  opportunity  to  use  a  weapon.  But  being  a 
powerful  man,  in  the  agony  of  his  struggles,  he  wrenched  the 
desk  from  its  fastenings  and  staggered  forward  endeavoring 
to  escape  the  blows.  He  could  not  see  his  assailant  who  had 
grabbed  him  by  the  collar  and  standing  above  him  in  the  de 
scending  aisle,  continued  the  blows  even  after  the  cane  was 
broken  and  Sumner  had  fallen  senseless  and  bleeding  at  his  feet. 
His  arm  was  stayed  at  last  and  he  was  forced  away  from  Sum 
ner  by  Representatives  Morgan  and  Murray  of  New  York,  who 
though  fifty  feet  away  and  standing  with  their  backs  turned, 
upon  their  attention  being  attracted,  had  promptly  rushed  to 
Sumner's  rescue.  Senator  Crittenden  of  Kentucky  hurried  to 
his  assistance  from  another  direction,  openly  and  emphatically 
condemning  the  conduct  of  Brooks.  Keitt  ran  to  the  assistance 
of  Brooks  and  threatened  to  strike  Crittenden  crying  to  him, 
"  Let  them  alone.  G — d  d — n  you  !  "  Edmundson  rushed  in  to 
Brooks'  assistance  from  another  direction.  And  cries  were 
heard:  "Don't  interfere!"  « Go  it,  Brooks!"  "Give  the 
d — d  Abolitionist  h — 1 ! "  etc.  Keitt  like  Brooks  was  armed 
with  a  cane,  which  he  flourished  as  he  came  forward,  threaten 
ing  those  who  interfered  and  he  kept  his  hand  upon  a  pistol 
ready  for  use. 

Toombs  of  Georgia  at  the  commencement  of  the  assault  stood 
in  front  of  the  Vice-President's  chair  in  plain  view,  talking  to 
Governor  Gorman  of  Minnesota.  They  observed  the  assault 
from  its  commencement.  Gorman  started  to  interfere  but 
Toombs  stood  still.  He  made  no  effort  to  protect  Sumner,  after 
wards  stating  that  he  approved  the  assault ;  but.  seeing  the  dan 
ger  that  Crittenden,  a  Southern  Senator,  had  encountered  in  his 
effort  to  rescue  Sumner,  he  went  to  his  protection.  Slidell,  of 
Louisiana,  and  Douglas  were  near  at  hand  in  an  ante-room,  en 
gaged  in  conversation,  when  a  messenger  rushed  up  and  an 
nounced  that  some  one  was  assaulting  Mr.  Sumner.  Neither 
attempted  to  interfere.  Slidell  afterwards  said  that  he  heard 
of  the  assault  without  "  any  particular  emotion ;  for  his  own 
part  he  confessed  he  felt  none,  that  he  had  no  associations  or 


LIFE   OF   CHARLE8  SUMNER  333 

relations  of  any  kind  with  Sumner  and  had  not  spoken  to  him 
for  two  years."  Yet  Slidell  it  was  who  had  thanked  Sumner 
five  years  before  for  his  "  chivalrous  and  zealous  "  defence  of 
his  brother,  the  captain  of  the  Somers,  against  the  charge  of 
wrongfully  hanging  the  son  of  the  Secretary  of  War  and  his  co- 
conspirators. 

Sumner  in  a  measure  lost  consciousness  with  the  first  blow 
and  when  he  recovered  he  was  lying  in  the  aisle  of  the  chamber 
with  his  head  supported  on  the  knee  of  Mr.  Morgan.  Dazed 
and  half  unconscious  as  he  was,  he  thought  he  saw  his  assailant 
standing,  still  gazing  intent  upon  him,  supported  on  either  side 
by  Douglas  and  Toombs.  As  to  Douglas,  who  had  not  left  the 
anteroom,  he  was  mistaken.  While  Sumner  was  being  assisted 
from  the  Chamber  to  a  sofa  in  the  lobby,  by  Mr.  Morgan  and 
James  W.  Simonton,  a  reporter  for  the  New  York  Times,  and 
others,  he  recognized  Slidell  retreating  before  him.  His  wounds 
were  dressed  by  a  physician  who  was  hastily  summoned  and  he 
was  removed  by  his  colleague  Wilson  and  Representative  Buf- 
fington  in  a  carriage,  still  only  partially  conscious,  to  his  room. 

Upon  examination  it  was  found  that  he  had  received  num 
erous  wounds,  two  principal  gashes,  one  over  each  ear  and  a 
little  back,  each  about  two  inches  long  and  laying  the  flesh 
open  to  the  bone.  Others  more  or  less  severe  to  the  number  of 
twenty  or  more  were  on  different  parts  of  the  head  and  arms  and 
hands.  Blood  flowed  copiously  from  the  wounds,  especially 
from  those  on  the  head,  so  that  his  coat  and  waistcoat  and  the 
collar  and  bosom  of  his  shirt  were,  in  places,  saturated.  So 
much  had  flowed  upon  the  shoulders  of  his  coat  that  it  soaked 
through  the  broadcloth  and  padding  of  the  shoulders  and  ap 
peared  through  the  lining.  "  He  was  covered  with  blood,"  ac 
cording  to  General  Webb,  afterwards  Minister  to  Brazil,  as  he 
"  never  saw  man  covered  before/'  Another  witness,  William  J. 
Leader,  though  belonging  to  a  different  political  party,  de 
clared  that  "  it  was  one  of  the  most  cold-blooded,  high-handed 
outrages  ever  committed  and  that  had  not  Mr.  Sumner  been 
a  very  large  and  powerfully  built  man  it  must  have  resulted  in 
his  death."  The  hands  and  cuffs  of  Mr.  Morgan  who  supported 
his  head  were  covered  with  his  blood. 

The  weapon  with  which  he  was  assaulted  was  a  walking-stick 
made  of  gutta-percha,  one  inch  in  diameter  at  the  larger  end 
and  tapering  to  five-eighths,  at  the  smaller.  It  was  broken 
with  the  weight  of  the  blows.  Owing  to  its  weight,  when  used 
by  a  powerful  man,  it  was  a  murderous  weapon.  The  physical 
condition  of  Sumner  and  the  masses  of  his  full  head  of  hair, 
which  he  wore  long  at  the  time,  probably  saved  his  life. 


334  LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

Promptly  the  morning  after  the  assault,  Wilson  arose  in  his 
place  in  the  Senate  and  recited  the  circumstances  of  the  as 
sault,  but  having  done  this  much  he  left  it  for  other  Senators 
to  decide  what  measures  should  be  taken.  The  Free-Soilers 
were  largely  in  the  minority  and  it  had  been  agreed  among 
them  that  it  should  be  left  to  the  opposition  to  propose  a  remedy 
\  and  that  Sumner's  friends  would  do  nothing  more  than  state 
the  case  unless  it  should  appear  that  the  Democrats  would  pro- 
I  pose  nothing.  After  Wilson's  statement,  a  short  silence  fol- 
'  lowed  and  the  Presiding  officer  was  calling  for  other  business, 
when  Seward  arose  and  moved  the  appointment  by  the  Chair 
of  a  committee  of  five  to  inquire  into  the  circumstances  of  the 
assault  and  report  a  statement  of  the  facts  and  their  opinion 
thereon  to  the  Senate.  Wilson  seconded  it.  Mason  moved  to 
amend  so  that  the  Senate  instead  of  the  Presiding  officer  would 
select  the  committee  and  the  motion  thus  amended  was  carried. 
Seward  and  Wilson,  the  movers,  who,  according  to  all  rules, 
should  have  been  selected,  were  excluded  from  the  committee 
and  those  chosen  were  all  from  the  opposition.  Two  of  the 
five  were  from  the  Slave  States ;  another  was  Cass.  The  com 
mittee  reported  that  the  Senate  had  no  power  to  arrest  or  pun 
ish  a  Member  of  the  House  and  that  all  they  could  do  was  to 
complain  to  that  body.  A  copy  of  the  affidavits  taken  by  the 
committee  and  of  their  report  was  ordered  sent  to  it. 

When  the  testimony  of  Sumner  was  read,  giving  his  recol 
lection  of  the  conduct  of  Toombs,  Slidell  and  Douglas  during 
the  assault,  it  called  forth  explanations  from  them  and  Butler 
who  had  in  the  meantime  returned  to  Washington.  They  ap 
proved  the  conduct  of  Brooks.  This  brought  the  Free-Soilers 
to  their  feet. 

Wade  said  that  he  proposed  to  vindicate  the  right  of  free 
speech,  though  he  had  to  come  armed  to  do  so. 

Wilson  said  it  was  "a  brutal,  murderous  and  cowardly  as 
sault,"  To  which  Butler  ejected,  "  You  are  a  liar ! "  This 
furnished  its  own  comment  upon  the  conduct  of  Brooks,  when 
seeking  to  justify  his  act,  by  the  language  used  by  Sumner  of 
Butler. 

In  the.  House  on  the  day  after  the  assault,  Campbell  of  Ohio, 
moved  the  appointment  of  a  committee  by  the  Speaker  to  in 
vestigate  and  report  the  facts  with  such  resolutions  as  in  its 
judgment  would  vindicate  the  House.  Campbell  with  four 
others  were  appointed,  three  Northern  Free-Soilers  and  two 
Southern  Democrats,  all  able  men.  This  committee  was  sin 
cere  in  its  efforts  to  investigate  the  circumstances  of  the  assault. 
It  invited  Brooks  to  be  present  and  ask  the  witnesses  any  ques- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  335 

tions  he  desired.  It  took  the  testimony  of  Sumner  at  his  rooms, 
he  being  unable  to  attend  the  sittings,  and  it  called  other  wit 
nesses  to  the  facts,  before  it,  and  subjected  them  all  to  an  ex 
amination  under  oath,  both  sides  being  represented.  It  occupied 
five  days  with  the  investigation  and  on  the  sixth  made  reports 
to  the  House.  The  majority  reported  that  it  was  an  unpro 
voked  outrage  in  violation  of  the  privileges  of  both  the  Senate 
and  the  House  and  of  the  provision  of  the  Constitution  which 
declared  that  a  member  "  for  any  speech  or  debate  in  either 
house  shall  not  be  questioned  in  any  other  place."  It  con 
cluded  with  a  resolution  for  the  expulsion  of  Brooks  and  of 
censure  of  Keitt  and  Edmundson.  It  was  signed  by  the  three 
Free-Soilers,  Campbell  of  Ohio,  Spinner  of  New  York  and 
Pennington  of  New  Jersey.  The  minority  composed  of  Cobb  of 
Georgia  and  Greenwood  of  Arkansas  reported  that  the  House 
had  no  jurisdiction  of  the  case  and  declined  to  express  any 
opinion  on  the  facts. 

The  House  refused  to  adopt  the  report  of  Cobb  and  Green 
wood,  by  a  vote  of  sixty-six  yeas  and  one  hundred  and  forty-five 
nays.  The  resolution  of  expulsion  was  lost,  yeas  one  hundred 
and  twenty-one,  nays  ninety-five,  it  not  having  received  the 
necessary  two-thirds  vote.  Keitt  was  censured;  Edmundson 
was  not. 

As  soon  as  the  vote  on  the  resolution  of  expulsion  was  taken, 
Brooks  arose  and  with  some  difficulty  obtained  permission  to 
address  the  Ho-use.  Giddings  opposed  it,  but  finally  yielded  to 
the  persuasion  of  friends  and  withdrew  his  objection.  Brooks 
then  proceeed  in  a  braggart  speech  in  which  he  insinuated  that 
"  a  blow  struck  by  him  then,  would  be  followed  by  a  revolution, 
which  would  result  in  subverting  the  foundations  of  the  Gov 
ernment  and  in  drenching  the  Hall  of  Congress  in  blood/'  ad 
mitted  that  he  had  committed  the  assault  "  very  deliberately  " 
and  insinuated  that  if  Sumner  had  resisted  he  would  have 
killed  him.  He  closed  by  declaring  that  he  was  no  longer  a 
member  of  the  House.  He  had  already  placed  his  resignation 
in  the  hands  of  the  Governor  of  his  State  to  take  effect  when  he 
announced  it  himself  in  Congress.  By  this  means  he  prevented 
any  farther  action  being  taken  against  him  by  the  House. 

Mason  and  Butler  sat  near  him  in  the  House  while  he  spoke 
and  when  he  finished  and  walked  out  of  the  door  he  was 
met  by  Southern  women  who  were  present  to  congratulate  him. 
Keitt  also  resigned,  to  procure  the  indorsement  of  his  constit 
uents,  upon  his  conduct.  Both  were  promptly  re-elected,  with 
substantial  unanimity  and  were  back  in  their  places  in  the 


336  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

House  within  a  few  days,  completely  purged  of  the  political 
consequences  of  their  deeds. 

The  criminal  punishment  inflicted  was  hardly  less  a  farce. 
A  complaint  was  made  against  Brooks  alone  and  he  was  in 
dicted  by  the  Grand  Jury.  He  appeared  in  court,  attended  by 
a  coterie  of  Southern  friends,  among  whom  were  Mason  and 
Butler,  admitted  the  assault,  but  sought  to  justify  it  in  a  speech 
likening  himself  to  husbands  who  defend  their  wounded  honor. 
He  was  fined  three  hundred  dollars  and  discharged  without 
imprisonment.  Sumner  took  no  part  in  the  prosecution,  ex 
cept  when  subpoenaed  to  appear  and  testify  before  the  Grand 
Jury.  He  disclaimed  all  responsibility  for  it,  realizing  that 
any  punishment  would  be  inadequate  for  the  injuries  he  had 
received  and  the  hopelessness  of  expecting  proper  consideration 
for  the  case  from  the  courts  of  the  District,  as  then  constituted. 

But  Sumner  never  held  Brooks  personally  responsible.  He 
considered  him  as  the  irresponsible  agent  of  slavery  which  he 
regarded  as  the  guilty  principal  deserving  the  punishment. 
During  his  long  years  of  suffering,  no  one  heard  him  speak 
unkindly  of  Brooks,  but  as  soon  as  he  reached  his  rooms  after 
the  assault,  he  declared  that  whenever  he  was  able  to  return  to 
the  Senate  he  would  renew  the  warfare  against  slavery.  Years 
after,  when  one  day  walking  in  the  Congressional  Cemetery  at 
Washington,  his  companion,  George  William  Curtis,  called  his 
attention  to  a  cenotaph  of  Brooks,  which  Sumner  had  not  be 
fore  noticed.  His  only  remark  was,  "  Poor  fellow !  Poor  fel 
low  !  "  To  the  question  then  asked  by  Curtis,  "  How  did  you 
feel  about  Brooks  ?  "  He  replied :  "  Only  as  to  a  brick  that 
should  fall  upon  my  head  from  a  chimney.  He  was  the  uncon 
scious  agent  of  a  malign  power." 

The  feeling  aroused  by  the  assault  was  tremendous.  The 
opinion  has  been  ventured  that  no  other  event  except  a  na 
tional  victory  or  defeat  was  ever  attended  in  this  country  with 
so  much  excitement.  It  was  not  regarded  simply  as  the  assault 
of  one  man  upon  another,  whatever  prominence  might  be  given 
to  the  principals.  The  parties  were  treated  as  two  rival  powers, 
Freedom  and  Slavery,  and  the  assault  as  the  attitude  of  the 
contending  forces  towards  each  other.  Before  the  assault  af 
fairs  in  Kansas  had  arrested  the  attention  of  the  country,  as  a 
condition  bordering  closely  upon  civil  war;  but  the  South  op 
posed  all  discussion  of  the  slavery  question.  Now  the  North 
felt  that  the  South  was  determined  to  suppress,  by  the  bludgeon, 
the  right  of  free  thought  and  free  speech.  Though  it  was  never 
proved,  the  conviction  was  wide  spread,  at  the  time,  that  the  act 
of  Brooks  was  the  result  of  a  conference  of  Southern  statesmen 


LIFE   Off  CHARLES   &UMNER  337 

whereat  it  was  determined  that  the  North  must  be  silenced  by 
an  example,  made  of  Sumner.  The  act  of  an  obscure  Kepre- 
sentative,  whose  name  was  hardly  known  beyond  his  own  Dis 
trict  in  staining  the  floor  of  the  Senate  Chamber  with  the  blood 
of  a  Senator, .who  sat  quietly  writing  at  his  desk,  sent  a  wave 
of  passion  over  the  country. 

When  Sumner's  colleague  Wilson  followed  Wade  in  answering 
the  speeches  of  Toombs  and  Slidell  approving  the  assault,  by 
pronouncing  it  "  brutal,  murderous  and  cowardly  ",  this  lan 
guage  incensed  Brooks  and  he  soon  after  by  the  hand  of  Joseph 
Lane  of  Oregon,  later,  on  the  ticket  with  John  C.  Breckenridge 
of  Kentucky,  a  candidate  for  Vice-President,  sent  Wilson  a 
challenge  to  a  duel. 

A  few  days  later,  in  a  debate  on  the  Kansas  bill,  Butler  un 
dertook  to  reply  to  Sumner's  speech.  His  answer  abounded  in 
personalities.  With  much  unction  he  said  that  against  the 
complaints  of  his  friends,  he  had  "  kept  up  an  intercourse  with 
Sumner  which  was  calculated  to  give  him  a  currency  far  beyond 
what  he  might  have  had."  This  speech  brought  Wilson  to  his 
feet  who,  after  ridiculing  "  the  piny  wood  doctrine — the  planta 
tion  idea  "  that  Butler  could  give  Charles  Sumner  social  stand 
ing  anywhere,  then  proceeded  at  length  to  enumerate  the  in 
stances  and  quote  the  language  of  Butler  in  his  speeches,  to  show 
that  ever  since  Sumner  entered  the  Senate,  he  had  been  wilfully 
insulting  and  aggravating  towards  him. 

In  the  House  the  display  of  feeling  was  greater  than  in  the 
Senate. 

Burlingame,  one  of  the  Boston  members  denounced  the  act 
"  in  the  name  of  that  fair  play  which  bullies  and  prize-fighters 
respect"  and  said  that  in  a  place  hitherto  sacred  against  vio 
lence  he  had  smote  Sumner  as  Cain  smote  his  brother. 

For  this  language  Brooks  sent  a  challenge  to  Burlingame, 
which  was  accepted.  Campbell,  who  had  the  arrangement  of 
the  preliminaries,  fixed  the  Clifton  House,  Canada,  as  the  place 
of  meeting;  and  Burlingame,  late  at  night,  left  Washington  to 
keep  the  appointment,  but  he  was  recalled,  Brooks  having  de 
clined.  His  excuse  was  that  in  the  excited  state  of  feeling,  in 
the  North,  it  would  be  unsafe  for  him  to  pass  through  it  to 
reach  Canada. 

But  the  large  vote  for  expulsion  made  Southerners  feel  they 
had  gone  too  far.  The  Northern  and  Western  members  were 
harmonious.  Instead  of  the  usual  self-confident  one,  South 
erners  adopted  an  apologizing  tone  in  meeting  the  indignation 
awakened  by  the  deed.  Public  feeling  and  the  fear  that  it 


338  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

might  influence  the  National  election,  in  which  they  hoped 
again  to  be  successful  were  having  an  effect  upon  them. 

These  considerations  were,  however,  little  felt  in  the  South- 
.  land.  There  the  feeling  was  one  of  general  congratulation. 
There  may  -have  been  individuals  who  hesitated  to  adopt  the 
act,  actuated  by  opposition  to  slavery  or  abhorrence  of  the 
deed  or  cautioned  by  the  clouds  that  seemed  to  be  gathering, 
which  their  less  thoughtful  neighbors  had  not  observed ;  but  if 
so  they  were  silent  in  the  presence  of  the  uniform  and  uncon 
trollable  rejoicing  of  their  neighbors  that  the  wilful  spirit  of 
interference  with  their  institution  had  at  last  been  rebuked  by 
physical  force.  The  act  of  Brooks  was  generally  indorsed,  in 
the  States  that  were  afterwards  in  rebellion. 

Within  a  week  after  the  assault  some  South  Carolinians  to 
show  their  appreciation  of  his  act  presented  Brooks  with  a 
cane  bearing  the  inscription,  "  Hit  him  again."  Another  cane 
was  presented  to  him  by  the  students  of  the  University  of  Vir 
ginia. 

The  attitude  of  the  newspapers  of  the  South  was  frankly 
stated  by  The  Richmond  Examiner  when  it  said  that  they 
"  applauded  the  conduct  of  Brooks  without  condition  or  limi- 
...  tation,  that  their  approbation  was  entire  and  unreserved." 

But  the  South  was  not  more  united  in  the  support  of  Brooks 
than  the  North  was  in  support  of  Sumner.  The  Legislature 
of  Massachusetts,  the  Ministers  of  Boston  and  the  Abolition 
Convention  at  Syracuse,  New  York,  condemned  it.  There  was 
a  monster  meeting  held  in  New  York  city,  which  was  ad 
dressed  by  William  Cullen  Bryant  and  others.  William  M. 
Evarts  presented  the  resolutions,  which  after  narrating  the 
facts  declared  that  there  was  nothing  "  in  the  meditation,  the 
preparation  or  the  execution  of  this  outrage  by  Brooks  which 
should  qualify  the  condemnation  with  which  they  pronounced 
it,  brutal,  murderous  and  cowardly."  Two  meetings  were  held 
in  Boston,  one  at  Chapman's  Hall,  addressed  by  Wendell  Phil 
lips;  another  at  Faneuil  Hall  addressed  by  the  Governor  of 
Massachusetts,  and  others;  one  at  Cambridge  addressed  by 
Felton,  Sparks,  Longfellow  and  others.  Meetings  in  condemna 
tion  of  the  act  were  also  held  at  Canandaigua,  N.  Y.,  Provi 
dence,  E.  I.,  and  Concord,  Mass. 

The  address  of  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson  at  the  Concord  meet 
ing  contained  a  discriminating  tribute  to  Sumner:  "I  think, 
Sir,"  he  said,  "if  Mr.  Sumner  had  any  vices,  we  should  be 
likely  to  hear  of  them.  They  have  fastened  their  eyes  like 
microscopes,  now  for  five  years,  on  every  act,  word,  manner  and 
movement,  to  find  a  flaw, — and  with  what  result?  His  oppo- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  339 

nents  accuse  him  neither  of  drunkenness,  nor  debauchery,  nor 
job,  nor  peculation,  nor  rapacity,  nor  personal  aim  of  any  kind. 
No;  but  with  what?  Why,  beyond  this  charge  which  it  is  im 
possible  was  ever  sincerely  made,  that  he  broke  over  the  pro 
prieties  of  debate,  I  find  him  accused  of  publishing  his  opinion 
of  the  Nebraska  conspiracy  in  a  letter  to  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  with  discourtesy.  Then  that  he  is  an  Abolition 
ist,  as  if  every  sane  human  being  were  not  an  Abolitionist,  or  a 
believer  that  all  men  should  be  free.  And  the  third  crime  he 
stands  charged  with  is,  that  his  speeches  were  written  before 
they  were  spoken;  which  of  course  must  be  true  in  Mr.  Sum- 
ner's  case, — as  it  was  true  of  Webster,  of  Adams,  of  Calhoun, 
of  Burke,  of  Chatham,  of  Demosthenes,  of  every  first-rate 
speaker  that  ever  lived.  It  is  the  high  compliment  he  pays  to 
the  intelligence  of  the  Senate  and  of  the  country.  When  the 
same  reproach  was  cast  upon  the  first  orator  of  ancient  times 
by  some  caviller  of  his  day,  he  said,  '  I  should  be  ashamed  to 
come  with  one  unconsidered  word  before  such  an  assembly.' '' 

"  Mr.  Chairman,  when  I  think  of  these  most  small  faults  as 
the  worst  which  party  hatred  could  allege,  I  think  I  may  bor 
row  the  language  which  Bishop  Burnet  applied  to  Sir  Isaac 
Newton,  and  say  that  Charles  Sumner  f  has  the  whitest  soul  I 
ever  knew/  ?: 

Sumner's  European  friends  were  astonished  at  the  assault 
and  declared  that  it  revealed  a  condition  of  things  in  the  United 
States  inexplicable  to  Englishmen.  And  right  well  it  might. 
It  was  a  decided  jar  to  the  people  of  the  North.  The  whole 
affair,  in  its  inception,  its  execution  and  its  conclusion  in  the 
South,  furnished  an  object  lesson  of  the  political  condition  of 
the  country  as  caused  by  slavery  that  had  not  been  realized 
before. 

While  the  proceedings  for  the  expulsion  of  Brooks  were  pend 
ing,  in  the  House,  the  National  Conventions  had  been  held. 
The  Republicans  had  united  on  the  issue  between  the  North 
and  the  South.  For  President  they  had  nominated  John  C. 
Fremont,  a  young  man  with  a  career  having  all  the  interest  of 
fiction,  an  ideal  candidate  for  a  new  party.  The  Democrats  had 
nominated  James  Buchanan;  and  the  pro-slavery  wing  of  the 
American  party  nominated  Fillmore.  The  contest  was  a  warm 
one.  The  assault  of  Brooks  and  his  later  brag  that  a  blow  by 
him  would  dissolve  the  Union,  entered  into  the  campaign.  The 
Eepublicans  declared  that  they  did  not  want  a  Union  that  was 
held  together  at  the  pleasure  of  one  man.  Sumner  thus  became 
an  issue  in  the  campaign  and  there  was  an  unprecedented  de 
mand  for  copies  of  his  speech.  It  became  a  campaign  docu- 


340  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

ment  and  was  circulated  by  the  hundred  thousand.  It  was 
printed  in  the  newspapers  and  there  were  large  pamphlet  edi 
tions  at  Washington,  New  York  and  Boston  and  San  Fran 
cisco.  It  appeared  in  German  and  Welsh  and  was  reprinted  in 
London. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  follow  the  other  parties  to  this  tragedy 
a  step  farther.  Brooks  lived  to  return  to  Congress,  at  its  next 
session,  and  to  make  a  speech  for  slavery.  But  he  did  not  live 
to  see  the  close  of  the  session.  His  manner  and  appearance 
changed ;  his  black  hair  turned  gray,  he  seemed  nervous  and  ill- 
at-ease,  casting  furtive  glances  about  him  wherever  he  went,  as 
if  fearful  of  retribution,  silent  and  dissatisfied  ;  men  and  women 
of  the  North,  who  had  mingled  with  him  before,  now  avoided 
him ;  he  had  no  associates  except  from  his  own  section.  The 
notoriety  he  had  acquired  became  distasteful  to  him;  he  con 
fessed  he  was  tired  of  appearing  as  the  prince  of  bullies.  Sum- 
ner  narrowly  escaped  death  at  his  hands,  and  his  vacant 
chair  in  the  Senate  Chamber  reminded  him  while  he  lived 
of  the  suffering  he  had  caused.  Remorse  for  his  deed  seemed 
to  seize  him  and  affect  his  health.  But  it  did  not  last  long. 
Near  the  close  of  January,  1857,  he  contracted  a  cold  and  after 
a  brief  illness,  so  brief  that  it  was  not  known  to  the  public,  it 
took  the  form  of  a  violent  croup,  or  inflammation  of  the  throat 
and  he  died  suddenly  a  terrible  death,  struggling  and  gasping 
for  breath,  gripping  his  throat  and  apparently  trying  to  tear  it 
open.  No  physician  was  at  hand  to  afford  him  relief. 

The  news  of  his  death  went  out  among  his  associates  in 
Washington,  and  over  the  country,  and  recalled  the  wounds  in 
flicted  upon  Sumner,  still  less  than  a  year  old,  with  the  circum 
stances  fresh  in  men's  minds.  A  feeling  seemed  to  prevail 
that  the  same  Power  which  apparently  had  avenged  this  wrong 
might  also  avenge  the  wrongs  of  the  slaves. 

Two  days  after  his  death,  eulogies  were  pronounced  upon 
Brooks  in  the  House,  but  in  them  there  was,  with  one  exception 
ill-starred  and  in  bad  taste,  no  reference  to  the  assault  upon 
Sumner.  The  same  day  he  was  buried  from  the  House,  in  the 
Congressional  Cemetery  at  Washington,  where  a  cenotaph 
remains  to  mark  the  spot.  Two  weeks  later  his  body  was  re 
moved  to  its  final  resting-place  in  the  Baptist  Churchyard  at 
Edgefield,  South  Carolina,  the  place  of  his  birth.  Here  with  a 
public  funeral,  a  eulogy,  with  civil  and  military  display,  it  was 
laid  in  the  family  lot  beside  that  of  his  father  and  mother  and 
other  relatives.  Over  it  rises  a  monument  to  his  memory,  the 
most  conspicuous  in  the  cemetery,  though  there  also  lies  the 
body  of  Pickens,  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina,  when  the  first 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES 'SUMNER  341 

gun  of  the  Confederacy  was  fired  upon  Fort  Sumter.  The 
shaft  has  on  it  the  sentence  from  Keitt's  Congressional  eulogy ; 
"  Earth  has  never  pillowed  upon  her  bosom  a  truer  son,  nor 
Heaven  opened  wide  her  gates  to  receive  a  manlier  spirit !  " 
And  so  with  marked  honor,  was  laid  to  rest  by  the  South  this 
champion  of  her  peculiar  institution.  It  was  an  example  to  her 
young  men,  who  in  defence  of  the  same  cause,  later  sought  glor} 
upon  other  fields. 

A  little  later,  on  the  25th  of  May,  1857,  Butler  died  at  his 
home  in  South  Carolina.  Keitt  lived  to  take  an  active  and  vin 
dictive  part  in  the  Rebellion  and  died  in  battle  in  1864,  having 
lived  long  enough  to  see  the  Confederacy  his  hands  had  con 
tributed  to  form,  crumbling  to  pieces.  He  lies  to-day  buried,  in 
an  unmarked  spot,  near  Saint  Matthew,  South  Carolina,  only 
one  county  intervening  between  his  grave  and  that  of  Brooks. 
Of  them  all,  Edmundson  alone  survived  the  Civil  War. 


CHAPTER  XXIV 

NATURE    OF  SUMNER'S  INJURIES — GOES  TO  SILVER  SPRINGS,  TO 

PHILADELPHIA,  CAPE  MAY  AND  CRESSON  SPRINGS HONORS 

—PUBLIC    INTEREST    IN    HIM PUBLIC    RECEPTION    AT 

BOSTON 

AT  first  Sumner's  wounds  seemed  to  heal  readily.  He  was  in 
the  prime  of  life,  of  vigorous  constitution,  with  good  habits,  so 
that  everything  favored  a  speedy  recovery.  When  he  reached 
his  rooms,  after  his  wounds  were  dressed,  and  he  had  recovered 
consciousness,  he  was  able  to  converse  and  while  his  wounds 
were  painful  and  the  shock  to  his  system  very  noticeable,  no 
permanent  results  were  apprehended.  The  next  day,  Thursday, 
he  was  able  to  sit  up  and  move  about  his  apartments  and  he 
wished  to  go  to  the  Senate,  but  was  dissuaded  from  doing  so. 
His  condition  was  not  materially  different  on  Saturday  and 
Sunday;  but  on  the  fourth  day,  Monday,  unfavorable  symp 
toms  appeared.  That  night  he  was  feverish,  unable  to  sleep; 
the  wounds  on  his  head  pained  him  severely.  The  glands  of  his 
neck  became  swollen  and  the  tendons  sore  to  the  touch,  with 
evidence  of  inflammation.  The  next  day  the  large  wound  on 
the  right  side  of  the  head  which  had  been  closed  with  collodion 
was  opened  and  it  discharged  a  tablespoonful  of  pus.  This 
afforded  him  relief  from  pain  and  enabled  him,  under  the  in 
fluence  of  an  opiate,  to  get  some  sleep.  The  next  three  days, 
his  condition  was  critical,  there  being  danger  of  blood  poison 
and  erysipelas.  But  this  wound  was  kept  open  and  poulticed 
and  the  symptoms  became  more  favorable.  The  wounds  on  the 
left  side  of  the  head  healed  promptly,  and  to  all  appearances 
naturally.  After  the  opening  and  poulticing  those  on  the  right 
side  healed  also. 

His  vacant  chair  in  the  Senate  troubled  him.  He  had  rep 
resented  Massachusetts  there  for  'more  than  five  years, — years 
of  excitement  and  hard  work,  with  few  rewards.  He  had  been 
one  of  a  small  but  diligent  minority.  All  this  time,  his  chair 
had  never  been  vacant  a  day.  He  had  been,  in  the  Senate,  the 
leader  of  the  little  band  of  anti-slavery  men,  in  the  old  dark 
days.  But  now  the  prospect  seemed  to  be  changing.  Slavery 
had  over-reached  itself;  the  scenes  in  Kansas  and  in  the  Senate 
Chamber  had  brought  a  revulsion  of  feeling  in  the  North;  a 

342 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  343 

new  political  party  was  organizing  whose  paramount  issue  was 
opposition  to  slavery.  For  years  Sumner  had  wished  for  such  a 
party  and  had  been  laboring  with  all  his  power  to  create  it. 
There  seemed  to  be  a  promise  of  its  success.  With  all  this  in 
prospect  it  was  hard  for  him  to  suffer  enforced  idleness.  The 
sands  of  his  term  were  slipping  away  and  the  time  for  the  elec 
tion  of  his  successor  was  approaching;  he  wished  to  strike 
slavery  again  from  his  vantage  ground  in  the  Senate  and  show 
his  fidelity  and  his  power.  His  physician  seeing  this  frame  of 
mind  had  to  caution  him  against  its  effect  upon  his  shattered 
health. 

Southern  statesmen  saw  the  effect  the  assault  was  having 
in  the  North  and  feared  that  Brooks  had  gone  too  far.  There 
was  a  disposition  among  them  to  heal  it  over  and  hush  it  up. 
They  made  light  of  Sumner's  injuries,  insisted  that  they  were 
insignificant  and  that  there  was  no  reason  why  he  should  not  be 
in  his  place  in  the  Senate.  Prominent  in  this  was  Butler.  In 
his  reply  to  Sumner's  speech,  he  referred  to  his  absence  and 
said  that,  judging  from  Dr.  Boyle's  statement,  he  could  see  no 
reason  why  he  was  not  present  in  his  seat,  that  his  wounds  were 
insignificant,  that  if  he  were  an  officer  in  the  army  and  absented 
himself  from  duty  under  such  circumstances  he  would  be 
cashiered.  Again  Butler  returned  to  it  tauntingly,  attributing 
his  absence  to  his  regard  for  his  personal  appearance,  "  being 
rather  a  handsome  man,"  evidently  hoping  that  such  speeches 
would  hasten  his  appearance  or  at  least  make  light  of  his 
absence.  In  Sumner's  condition  of  nervous  and  physical 
prostration  such  things  only  worried  him  and  retarded  his 
recovery. 

Dr.  Boyle's  services  had  proven  unsatisfactory,  not  so  much 
from  a  want  of  professional  ability  or  even  fidelity,  but  because 
of  his  apparent  Southern  sympathies  and  surroundings.  -  He 
offered  to  go  Brooks'  bail  when  arrested ;  he  was  the  landlord  of 
Edmundson;  and  he  furnished  a  statement  of  Sumner's  con 
dition  to  be  read  in  the  Senate,  which  though  not  untruthful 
had  a  tendency  to  mislead  because  it  was  entrusted  by  the  doctor 
to  Butler  to  present.  He  was  later  the  physician  of  Brooks. 
Just  as  Sumner  was  in  his  most  critical  condition,  when  his  life 
for  three  days  seemed  to  hang  in  the  balance,  his  brother  George 
arrived  in  Washington,  and  the  unsatisfactory  surroundings  of 
DT.  Boyle  becoming  known  to  him,  he  discontinued  his  em 
ployment  and  Dr.  Harvey  Lindsly  was  employed  in  his  stead, 
and  Dr.  Marshal  S.  Perry  of  Boston,  happening  to  be  in  the 
city,  was  called  in  consultation.  When  Butler  made  his  first 
statement,  that  nothing  prevented  Sumner's  presence  in  the 


344  LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

Senate,  Dr.  Lindsly,  the  same  day,  made  a  written  certificate 
that  Sumner  was  not  able  then  to  be  in  the  Senate,  nor  would  he 
be  for  some  time  to  come,  and  that  his  advice  to  him  was  to  go 
at  once  away  from  Washington  and  its  excitement  and  seek 
quiet,  in  the  open  air. 

As  the  wounds  on  Sumner's  head  healed,  violent  neuralgic 
pains  appeared  periodically  about  the  base  of  the  brain  and  neck 
and  the  paroxysms  of  pain  were  succeeded  by  a  feeling  of  heavy 
pressure, — as  Sumner  described  it,  as  of  fifty-six  pound  pres 
sure, — upon  the  head  and  spinal  cord,  attended  with  a  feeling 
of  extreme  weakness  and  incapacity  for  any  exertion,  either 
mental  or  physical.  When  attempting  to  walk  there  was  faint- 
ness  and  want  of  strength  and  his  gait  was  uncertain  and  tot 
tering  like  that  of  an  old  man  of  eighty  years  of  age.  From 
this  condition  there  was  for  a  long  time  hardly  any  improve 
ment,  but  it  was  attended  with  alternations  of  hope  and  disap 
pointment.  For  years  health  was  to  seem  always  just  within 
his  grasp  and  yet  always  eluding  him. 

To  keep  him  as  quiet  as  possible  and  prevent  the  bad  effects 
of  excitement  visitors  were  excluded,  during  the  first  week, 
from  his  room.  After  that  he  was  permitted  to  see  callers.  His 
own  party  were  diligent  in  their  attentions,  but  the  Democrats 
remained  away.  During  the  first  four  weeks  he  was  in  bed 
twenty-two  hours  each  day.  Somewhat  improved  he  went, 
about  the  middle  of  June,  to  Silver  Springs,  the  country  home 
of  P.  P.  Blair,  in  Maryland,  but  near  Washington,  where  he 
remained  till  the  fifth  of  July.  Here  he  suffered  a  relapse  and 
his  life  was  again  despaired  of;  some  symptoms  led  to  the 
belief  that  insanity  or  partial  paralysis  was  the  threatening 
danger.  While  at  Silver  Springs  he  was  in  Washington  only 
once  and  then  to  appear  before  the  Grand  Jury  under  service 
of  a  writ  of  the  United  States  Court.  When  he  returned  to 
Washington  on  July  fifth,  it  was  to  arrange  to  go  North,  to 
escape  the  heat.  He  left  there  on  July  seventh,  the  same  day 
that  Brooks  plead  guilty  to  the  indictment,  going  by  invitation 
to  Philadelphia,  to  spend  some  time  at  the  homes  of  J.  T.  and 
W.  H.  Furness.  Here  he  was  under  the  care  of  Dr.  Casper 
Wister. 

Dr.  Wister  advised  him  to  go  to  the  mountains  where  he 
would  have  a  high  altitude  and  a  cooler  atmosphere,  but  he 
yielded  to  the  friendly  persuasions  of  the  family  of  James  T. 
Furness  to  go  with  them  to  their  cottage  at  Cape  May.  Here 
they  hoped  the  cooling  breeze  and  salt  air  would  restore  him 
to  something  of  the  vigor  he  had  enjoyed  at  his  old  home  by  the 
eea,  to  which  his  heart  still  turned.  But  they  were  disap- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  345 

pointed.  He  did  not  have  sufficient  strength  to  either  walk  by 
the  sea  or  enjoy  bathing.  He  could  only  spend  his  time  lying 
upon  a  sofa  or  sitting  in  an  arbor,  looking  out  upon  the  water. 
The  heat  during  the  day  often  became  insufferable  and  so  on 
August  third  he  went  to  Cresson,  Pa.,  in  the  mountains,  where 
he  remained  till  the  first  days  of  September,  receiving  treat 
ment  from  Dr.  E.  M.  Jackson  and  living  as  the  guest  of  his 
family. 

Here  he  made  some  perceptible  improvement.  But  the 
pressure  about  his  head  and  spine,  his  extreme  weakness  and 
nervousness,  the  imperfect  use  of  his  limbs,  still  continued, 
with  wakefulness.  He  often  did  not  close  his  eyes  in  sleep 
once  during  the  night.  Some  days  he  seemed  better,  others 
worse,  almost  as  bad  as  ever,  though  he  could  get  out  of  doors, 
walk  a  little  and  ride  on  horseback,  starting  very  moderately 
and,  as  the  days  passed,  increasing  the  length  of  his  rides.  But 
withal  he  showed  an  almost  morbid  anxiety  to  be  well  and 
back  again  at  his  work. 

This  was  revealed  in  letters  that  he  wrote  to  his  friends. 
But  those  who  knew  his  condition  urged  quiet  upon  him  and 
complete  restoration,  before  he  attempted  to  do  any  work. 

A  nomination  for  Governor  of  Massachusetts  was  talked  of 
to  give  the  people  an  opportunity  by  their  votes  to  show  their 
approval  of  his  work  in  the  Senate;  but  he  put  it  aside.  In 
the  National  Republican  Convention  he  received  votes  for  both 
President  and  Vice-President.  The  Governor  of  Massachusetts 
recommended  to  the  Legislature  the  payment  of  the  expenses  of 
his  illness ;  and  a  public  subscription  for  a  memorial  to  him,  in 
approbation  of  his  recent  speech  was  started  and  a  thousand 
dollars  had  already  been  subscribed  before  it  was  known  to  him. 
He  declined  and  urged  that  whatever  could  be  given  be  applied 
to  promote  and  secure  Kansas  against  the  encroachments  of 
slavery.  The  money  subscribed  was  accordingly  given  to  that 
object.  He  contributed  one  hundred  dollars,  of  his  own  means, 
to  the  same  purpose,  when  a  public  subscription  was  started 
and  urged  by  the  public  journals  in  accordance  with  his  sug 
gestion. 

The  degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws  was  conferred  upon  him  by  two 
colleges,  Yale  and  Amherst.  In  a  peculiarly  felicitous  letter, 
President  Woolsey  of  Yale  explained  that  the  action  of  his  col 
lege,  in  conferring  this  degree  was  dictated  neither  by  political 
feeling  nor  by  recent  occurrences  nor  yet  to  secure  popular 
favor ;  for  none  of  these  things  would  justify  literary  honors ; 
but  that  the  motive  which  led  to  this  action  was  sincere  respect 
for  his  literary,  legal  and  political  attainments  and  cultivation, 


346  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  an  equally  sincere  respect  for  the  principles  of  his  political 
career.  And,  he  added,  what  should  also  have  added  to  the 
honor,  that  no  outside  suggestion  had  led  to  this  action  but  that 
the  thought  of  it  had  originated  entirely  within  the  Corpora 
tion. 

Such  words  were  a  solace  to  Sumner  in  the  exhausted  and 
broken  condition  of  his  health.  Literary  honors  and  the  ap 
probation  of  literary  men  were  always  grateful  to  him.  In 
moments  of  relaxation  all  his  life,  his  thoughts  had  easily 
turned  to  literature.  The  lines  of  a  beautiful  poem,  the  pages 
of  some  old  author,  dead  perhaps  a  thousand  years,  whose 
genius  had  created  the  thought,  did  not  want  for  apprecia 
tion  from  him.  They  humanized  and  broadened  the  man  and 
lifted  him  above  the  statesmanship,  which  lives  only  for  the 
hour,  into  the  region  of  things  which  will  live  for  all  time. 
Chase  and  Seward,  Wilson,  Wade  and  Giddings  were  his  as 
sociates  in  Washington ;  but  how  easily  his  thoughts  turned 
from  them  to  Longfellow,  Whittier,  Emerson,  Lowell  and 
Holmes  at  Boston.  Their  society  furnished  the  pleasure  and 
the  inspiration  of  his  quiet  hours  and  their  letters  were  the 
most  carefully  preserved  among  his  papers.  In  his  present 
condition  of  enforced  idleness  these  resources  were  precious 
ones  to  him. 

His  physician  insisted  upon  as  much  quiet  and  absence  of 
mental  exertion  as  possible.  But  Sumner  was  not  in  a  position 
to  be  altogether  divorced  from  the  campaign  that  was  absorbing 
public  attention.  Some  of  the  Eepublicans,  earnest  for  the  suc 
cess  of  Fremont,  not  appreciating  his  condition,  but  feeling  that 
he  occupied  the  position  of  a  martyr,  and  that  the  enthusiasm 
his  presence  and  co-operation  would  awaken,  would  aid  the 
ticket,  urged  him  to  take  part.  Chase  advised  him  to  accept 
the  nomination  for  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  be  elected  and 
hold  it  till  he  was  again  elected  to  the  Senate,  when  he  could 
resign;  Campbell  of  Ohio  who  had  been  the  leading  spirit,  in 
the  House,  in  securing  the  investigation  of  the  assault  and  the 
large  vote  for  expulsion  against  Brooks  and  the  censure  of 
Kcitt,  urged  him  to  be  present  at  a  great  meeting  to  be  held 
at  Hamilton,  Ohio,  even  if  his  health  would  not  permit  him  to 
speak.  The  Republicans  of  Rhode  Island  urged  him  to  address 
their  State  Convention;  and  calls  for  him  came  from  many 
directions  in  Massachusetts.  But  under  the  injunction  of  his 
physician,  he  made  the  one  answer  to  all  of  them,  that  he  could 
not  bear  even  the  fatigue  of  travelling,  much  less  the  excitement 
of  the  meetings,  or  the  strain  which  would  be  required  in  an 
effort  to  speak.  But  his  letters  were  read  at  the  meetings  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  347 

published,  and  showed  the  people  how  unequivocally  he  stood 
for  the  ticket,  and  how  much  he  wished  its  success.  In  this 
way  though  silent,  he  was  able  to  lend  his  aid.  These  letters 
were  necessarily  very  short,  for  the  least  exertion  seemed  to 
cause  a  reappearance  of  his  unfavorable  symptoms,  pressure 
upon  the  brain,  nervousness  and  extreme  weakness,  followed  by 
sleepless  nights. 

Early  in  September  he  left  Cresson  for  Philadelphia,  upon 
the  whole  improved,  but  far  from  being  well.  He  remained 
during  that  month  with  his  friends,  W.  H.  and  James  T.  Fur- 
ness,  at  Philadelphia  and  Cape  May,  receiving  treatment  again 
from  Dr.  Wister.  He  still  hoped  to  be  able  to  resume  his  duties 
at  the  opening  of  Congress  in  December.  He  was  anxious  to 
go  to  Massachusetts  and  vote  for  Fremont  and  the  Republican 
candidates  for  Congress.  The  result  on  Burlingame  was  ex 
pected  to  be  close  and  he  had  been  a  very  active  and  useful  Free- 
Soil  Member,  in  thorough  sympathy  with  Sumner.  And  there 
was  more  trouble  for  the  ticket  in  Boston  where  the  Webster 
Whigs  were  still  numerous  and  where  Burlingame  was  a  can 
didate  than  in  other  parts  of  the  State.  Sumner  insisted  that 
Boston  should  sustain  Burlingame,  not  merely  to  do  him  honor, 
but  to  save  herself  from  dishonor. 

He  had  remained  away  from  Boston,  feeling  that  the  ex 
citement  attending  his  return,  might  affect  him  injuriously. 
As  soon  as  it  became  known  that  he  would  go  home  to  vote,  a 
committee  waited  on  him,  in  Philadelphia,  and  urged  him  to 
accept  a  public  banquet.  But  he  did  not  feel  equal  to  such  an 
occasion.  Under  the  advice  of  his  physician,  it  was  finally  ar 
ranged,  however,  that  he  would  in  the  quietest  way,  accept  a 
public  reception  in  Boston.  No  organizations,  civil  or  military 
were  to  be  invited,  as  bodies,  to  take  part,  but  only  citizens,  as 
they  might  of  their  own  inclination  prefer,  so  that  the  recep 
tion  would  be  altogether  spontaneous  without  any  effort  being 
made  to  work  up  a  crowd. 

Sumner  reached  Cambridge,  Sunday  morning,  November 
second,  two  days  before  the  election,  and  went  directly  to  Long 
fellow's  home.  Here  he  remained  until  Monday,  when  he  went 
to  the  home  of  Amos  A.  Lawrence  in  Brookline,  where  he  was 
met,  after  noon,  by  a  procession  of  carriages  containing  the 
reception  committee  and,  in  an  open  barouche,  with  his  physi 
cian,  Dr.  Marshall  S.  Perry  and  Professor  Huntington  of 
Harvard,  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee,  they  proceeded  to 
Boston.  As  they  reached  the  city  line  they  were  met  by  a 
large  procession.  He  was  presented  by  Professor  Huntington 
and  was  welcomed  to  the  city  by  Josiah  Quincy. 


348  LIFE  Of1  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumner  replied  briefly,  and  the  procession  proceeded  to  the 
State  House.  The  whole  line  of  the  march  was  decorated  with 
flags  and  bunting  and  streamers.  Arriving  at  the  State  House, 
they  found  the  square  in  front  and  its  steps  and  doors  as  well 
as  those  of  the  surrounding  houses  and  even  the  roofs  crowded 
with  people.  The  stores  had  closed  and  the  whole  population 
of  Boston  had  turned  out  to  greet  him.  He  was  briefly  pre 
sented  to  the  Governor,  who  received  him  in  behalf  of  the  State. 
He  expressed  the  wish  that  in  the  quiet  of  his  home  he  would 
find  complete  restoration.  Then  he  counselled  the  people  that 
Sumner  was  still  a  sick  man  and  unable  to  endure  excitement 
and  asked  that  after  the  exercises  were  over,  they  would  leave 
him  to  the  quiet  of  his  home. 

When  the  Governor  had  finished  and  the  cheers  had  sub 
sided,  Sumner  expressed  his  gratitude  for  the  privilege  of  be 
ing  able  to  look  on  these  familiar  scenes,  and  thanked  them  for 
the  hospitality.  Here  voice  and  strength  failed  him  and  he  was 
compelled  to  hand  his  manuscript  to  the  reporters.  When  he 
ceased  he  entered  his  carriage  and  was  attended  to  his  home. 
Here  another  crowd  gathered  to  cheer  him  till  he  and  his 
mother  appeared  at  the  window.  The  reception  had  been  gener 
ous.  All  day  the  weather  was  propitious,  the  crowd  large 
and  the  enthusiasm  boundless. 

To  this  reception  was  attributed  the  election  of  Burlingame, 
who  succeeded  by  a  small  majority.  The  Republicans,  while 
their  National  ticket  was  defeated,  had  upon  the  whole  every 
reason  for  encouragement.  They  had  carried  every  New  Eng 
land  State  and  besides  New  York,  Ohio,  Michigan,  Wisconsin 
and  Iowa. 

The  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  was  Eepublican  and  Sum- 
ner's  reelection  was  assured.  During  the  previous  winter  it 
had  been  in  doubt.  At  that  session,  the  American  party  con 
trolled  and  they  discussed  the  election  of  some  one  else.  There 
was  some  anxiety  felt  over  this  and  at  the  suggestion  of  friends, 
Sumner  procured  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate  precedents 
against  the  validity  of  such  a  step.  They  were  published  in  the 
Boston  papers.  His  speech  on  the  Crime  against  Kansas  and 
the  Brooks  assault  followed  and  no  more  was  heard  of  the  move 
ment,  the  wave  of  popular  indorsement  was  so  great  that  all 
thought  of  such  action  was  abandoned. 

The  new  Legislature  met  on  January  seventh,  1857,  and 
without  waiting  even  for  the  Governor's  Message,  it  fixed  Jan 
uary  ninth  as  the  day  to  elect  a  Senator.  Promptly  upon  that 
day  they  proceeded  and  upon  the  roll  being  called  three  hun 
dred  and  thirty-three  members  of  the  House  voted  orally  for 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  349 

Sumner,  while  twelve  votes  were  cast  for  nine  other  persons, 
three  for  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  two  for  Nathaniel  J.  Lord,  the 
seven  remaining  being  for  as  many  others,  including  one  for 
Edward  Everett,  and  one  for  Rufus  Choate.  Four  days  later 
the  Senate  balloted  and  every  vote  was  for  Sumner.  This  re 
sult  was  without  effort  to  accomplish  it  on  his  part. 

The  unanimity  was  gratifying.  The  contrast  between  it  and 
the  first  election  was  unusual.  His  first  had  been  accomplished 
on  the  twenty-sixth  ballot  and  on  the  one  hundred  and  four 
teenth  day  of  the  session,  after  a  long,  weary  and  almost  des 
perate  struggle,  when  every  effort  was  made  to  defeat  him. 
Now  it  was  substantially  unanimous.  His  party  then  cast  only 
about  one-fifth  of  the  vote  of  the  State,  now  it  cast  more  than 
two-thirds  of  it.  He  then  went  to  a  Senate  where  he  could 
count  only  two  associates,  Chase  and  Hale,  though  having  the 
sympathy  of  two  others,  Seward  and  Wade.  Now  his  party 
numbered  one-fourth  of  the  Senate  and  a  majority  of  the 
House.  Then  not  a  single  state  could  be  carried  by  the  Free- 
Soilers ;  now  all  New  England  and  half  the  balance  of  the  Free 
States  were  with  him.  No  man  in  the  country  had  done  more 
to  bring  about  this  change. 

He  accepted  his  new  election  as  his  first,  in  a  letter  addressed 
to  the  Legislature,  which  was  read  and  entered  at  large  upon 
the  Journals. 

During  the  next  four  months  Sumner  was  an  invalid,  at  his 
home  in  Boston.  He  continued  his  exercise  by  walking  and 
horseback  riding.  He  visited  friends  in  Boston  and  Cam 
bridge.  But  most  of  his  time  was  spent  in  the  house  lying 
upon  a  sofa.  He  did  not  go  to  Washington,  at  the  opening  of 
Congress.  He  was  incapable  of  a  protracted  effort.  Late 
in  the  winter  he  left  for  Washington  so  as  to  vote  for  some 
changes  desired  by  his  constituents  in  the  tariff  of  1846  and 
take  the  oath  of  office  for  his  new  term  in  the  Senate  and  attend 
the  inauguration  of  President  Buchanan.  He  reached  there  on 
February  twenty-fifth,  in  time  to  vote  on  the  tariff  bill,  but  he 
was  not  able  to  continue  in  his  seat  and  the  effort  convinced  him 
that  he  was  totally  unfit  for  service.  He  tarried,  however,  long 
enough  to  take  the  oath  of  office  and  attend  the  inauguration. 
Three  days  later,  he  sailed  for  Europe,  on  the  steamer  Fulton, 
bound  from  New  York  to  Havre. 

His  physicians,  Drs.  Perry  and  Jackson,  as  well  as  many 
friends  advised  this  step.  He  was  reminded  by  the  fact  that 
he  had  been  urged  to  go  to  Washington  to  vote  on  the  tariff  bill 
when  he  was  not  able,  that  he  must  go  farther  away,  out  of 


350  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

sight  and  beyond  the  reach  of  the  troubles  and  excitement  of 
his  office,  and  obtain  absolute  rest. 

His  voyage  was  without  incident.  He  had  the  usual  sea 
sickness  from  which  he  always  suffered,  though  he  made  several 
ocean  voyages.  After  he  arrived,  he  caught  a  severe  cold; 
"  they  call  it  la  grippe  here,"  he  wrote, — a  teim  not  then  but 
since  well  known  in  the  United  States.  For  two  months  he 
suffered  from  it  and  at  times  it  was  so  severe  that  it  aggravated 
his  other  troubles  and  for  days  it  confined  him  to  his  rooms. 
His  steamer  entered  the  dock  at  Havre  on  the  morning  of 
March  twenty-first;  and  landing  about  eight  A.  M.,  after  a  short 
walk  enjoying  the  foreign  aspect  of  the  town,  he  started  for 
Rouen  at  eleven  in  the  forenoon.  He  reached  Rouen  at  two 
p.  M.,  and  spent  the  remainder  of  the  day  enjoying  the  Cathe 
dral  and  the  streets  of  this  old  town  which  seemed  to  have  a  pe 
culiar  attraction  for  him.  In  the  evening  he  attended  the 
theatre.  "  Weary  enough  now,"  he  wrote  that  night,  "  and  as 
tonished  that  I  am  able  to  endure  the  fatigue.  The  sea-air  or 
sea-sickness  or  absolute  separation  from  politics  at  home  or  all 
combined  have  given  me  much  of  my  old  strength."  The  next 
day  being  Sunday  he  attended  mass  and  vespers  in  the  Cathe 
dral,  drove  among  venerable  streets  and  by  the  market-place 
where  Joan  of  Arc  was  executed  and  at  evening  attended  a  cou 
ple  of  hours  at  the  opera. 

The  next  day,  a  beautiful  one  for  the  season,  after  a  pleas 
ant  trip  by  rail  he  reached  Paris, — "  astonished  at  the  magnifi 
cence  which  he  saw;  beyond  all  his  expectations."  The  nine 
teen  years  that  had  elapsed  since  his  first  visit,  had  wrought 
wonderful  changes  in  this  Capital  of  the  Beautiful  Arts.  Old 
buildings  had  been  demolished,  wide  and  spacious  boulevards 
had  been  opened,  lofty  structures  had  been  erected  and  trees 
planted,  on  either  side,  opening  beautiful  vistas  from  one  part 
of  the  city  to  another.  The  Seine  winding  its  sinuous  course 
among  magnificent  galleries  and  public  buildings  had  been  in 
closed  within  banks  of  solid  masonry  and  spanned  with  bridges 
of  stone  supported  by  graceful  pillars  and  arches.  The  streets 
touched  down,  with  gentle  grades,  to  the  spacious  promenades 
on  either  bank.  The  river  district,  unlike  that  of  most  cities, 
the  habitation  of  squalor  and  vice,  was  the  most  magnificent 
part  of  the  metropolis.  All  over  the  city,  available  spaces  at 
street  intersections  were  made  the  sites  for  a  triumphal  arch  or 
column,  or  fountain  or  other  work  of  art.  The  venerable  Cathe 
dral,  the  churches  and  theatres,  the  Invalides,  the  tomb  of 
Napoleon,  never  seemed  to  him  more  beautiful  and  more  mag 
nificent  than  now  in  the  sunshine  of  the  bright  spring  evening 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  351 

after  an  absence  of  years.  The  sight  of  them  seemed  to  awaken 
the  ardor  of  other  days  and  blot  out  years  that  had  intervened. 

Sumner's  first  effort  that  evening  was  to  find  his  old  French 
teacher.  He  inquired  for  him  at  his  former  quarters;  but  he 
was  gone.  "  The  places  that  knew  him  once,  knew  him  no 
more."  The  concierge,  who  had  been  there  twelve  years,  had 
never  even  heard  of  him.  He  then  sought  Crawford,  the  artist 
with  whom  he  had  passed  many  happy  hours  at  Eome  and 
for  whom,  after  his  return,  he  had  done  much  in  procuring  the 
purchase,  in  Boston,  of  his  statue,  representing  Orpheus  des 
cending  into  Hades  to  redeem  Eurydice, — whom  he  had  also 
aided  to  secure  the  order  for  the  equestrian  statue  of  Washing 
ton  at  Eichmond,  Virginia.  He  had  learned  he  was  in  Paris. 
Though  he  inquired  at  two  hotels,  he  could  not  find  him. 
Continuing  the  search  he  did  find  him  a  few  days  later,  confined 
to  his  apartments  and  nearing  death.  His  Italian  servant, 
learning  Sumner's  former  intimacy  with  his  master  disclosed 
his  grief  and  his  affection.  Crawford,  though  unable  to  see 
general  visitors,  when  told  that  Sumner  was  there,  insisted 
upon  seeing  him.  Sumner  held  him  by  the  hand  and  looking 
at  his  altered  features,  marked  by  the  foot  of  the  destroyer, 
thought  of  the  beautiful  genius  whom  he  had  met  nineteen 
years  before,  struggling  for  recognition  on  three  hundred  dollars 
a  year,  now  famous  in  his  profession,  his  studio  filled  with 
unfinished  orders,  passing  away  in  the  prime  of  years  and  the 
incompleteness  of  his  work. 

Sumner  visited  while  in  Paris  the  places  with  which  he 
was  familiar  on  his  former  trip, — the  pictures  and  statuary  in 
the  great  galleries  of  the  Louvre,  the  curiosities  of  the  Musee  de 
Cluny  and  at  the  Hotel  des  Invalides,  the  Pantheon,  the 
Madeleine,  the  Cathedral,  the  Law  School,  where  he  had  heard 
lectures,  the  Sorbonne,  the  operas  and  theatres.  Some  Ameri 
can  friends  were  there,  Elliot  C.  Cowdin,  T.  G.  Appleton, 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  Wm.  B.  Green,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  E.  C.  Matterson, 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  Geo.  B.  Emerson.  With  them  he  dined  and 
drove  and  attended  the  operas  and  galleries.  It  shows  some 
thing  of  the  quiet  of  the  life  he  was  leading  when  on  March 
twenty-sixth,  after  dining  with  Cowdin,  he  wrote,  "the  first 
time  1  have  met  company  at  dinner  for  ten  months/'  He  drove 
to  Versailles  to  see  the  fountains  play  and  again  to  visit  the 
galleries,  at  the  royal  palace.  He  also  drove  to  Saint  Cloud 
and  Saint  Germain  and  to  visit  the  porcelain  potteries  at 
Sevres.  He  went  to  the  great  cemeteries  Pere  la  Chaise  and 
Montmartre  and  to  the  royal  burying-place  at  St.  Denis.  With 
'Mr.  and  Mrs.  Matterson  he  drove  about  the  city  and  through 


352  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  new  park,  Bois  de  Boulogne,  "  new  to  me,"  he  wrote,  "  and 
as  beautiful  as  new."  It  was  a  royal  forest,  turned  over  to  the 
city  on  condition  that  it  be  improved  as  a  park. 

His  friend  De  Tocqueville  was  in  Paris  issuing  another  edi 
tion  of  his  book,  "  Democracy  in  America."  They  at  once  re 
newed  their  former  pleasant  relations.  They  dined  and  visited 
together,  discussed  questions  of  government  and  prison  dis 
cipline.  The  Emperor  Napoleon  Third  was  in  power.  De 
Tocqueville  did  not  conceal  his  dislike  for  him.  He  was  the  son 
of  Queen  Hortense,  daughter  of  Josephine.  She  had  married, 
against  her  own  wish,  Louis  Bonaparte,  a  younger  brother  of 
Napoleon,  afterwards  King  of  Holland.  There  was  talk  of  the 
illicit  relations  between  Hortense  and  the  Dutch  Admiral 
Verhuel  and  the  Emperor  was  said  to  be  the  offspring.  Alex 
ander  Walewski,  the  Minister  of  War,  was  the  reputed  son 
of  Napoleon  First.  De  Tocqueville  called  it  the  "  government 
of  the  bastards."  Queen  Hortense,  a  beautiful  woman,  en 
dowed  with  many  of  the  charming  traits  of  her  mother,  had 
thrown  herself  open  to  these  charges  by  some  indiscreet  con 
duct  although  her  subsequent  life  refuted  them  as  slanders. 
After  her  husband  had  become  alienated  from  his  brother, 
Napoleon  First,  and  been  deprived  of  his  crown,  Hortense  sepa 
rated  from  him  and  retired  to  Switzerland,  where  she  died 
twenty-eight  years  later.  Her  husband  survived  her  nine 
years.  Her  son,  Napoleon  III,  was  only  two  years  old  at  the 
time  of  their  separation. 

Sumner  himself  had  not  been  favorably  impressed  with 
Walewski,  the  Minister  of  War;  whose  reception  he  attended. 
He  noticed  his  resemblance  to  his  reputed  father,  Napoleon  I. 
When  Sumner  spoke  to  him  of  the  French  Secretary  at  Wash 
ington  and  commended  him  warmly,  Walewski  coldly  an 
swered  him  that  the  Secretary  could  not  wait  the  slow  course 
of  his  diplomatic  career  but  was  to  pass  into  the  consular 
service  whence  he  could  not  repass,  because  he  had  married 
a  wife  without  fortune.  The  Secretary  had  married  a  daughter 
of  Thomas  H.  Benton,  a  United  States  Senator  from  Missouri 
and  the  author  of  "  Thirty  Years  in  Congress."  She  was  a  sister 
of  the  wife  of  John  C.  Fremont,  whose  romantic  marriage  and 
loyal  devotion  to  her  husband  had  been  one  of  the  inspirations 
of  the  recent  Presidential  campaign.  Fremont  and  his  wife 
had  called  to  pay  their  respects  to  Sumner,  at  the  home  of 
John  Jay  in  New  York,  the  evening  before  he  sailed  for  Europe. 
It  is  hardly  to  be  wondered  that  Sumner  should  point  with  an 
exclamation  his  memorandum  of  the  degradation  of  the  French 
Secretary,  on  account  of  such  a  marriage. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  353 

Sumner  was  intimate  at  the  time  of  this  visit  with  Michael 
Chevalier,  who  was  sent  some  years  before  to  examine  the  rail 
roads  and  waterways  of  the  United  States.  He  published  the 
results  of  his  investigations  upon  his  return  to  France.  He  was 
a  writer  upon  economic  and  political  questions ;  and  was  cordial 
to  Sumner  from  the  first  and  showed  him  many  attentions,  en 
tertained  him  and  introduced  him  at  the  learned  societies. 

Another  friend  was  Alexander  Vattemare,  a  connoisseur, 
whose  specialty  was  the  international  exchange  of  duplicate 
books  and  works  of  art.  With  him  Sumner  repeatedly  dined 
and  drove.  De  Tocqueville  asked  Sumner  to  drive  to  meet  the 
granddaughter  of  Lafayette,  Mademoiselle  Corcelle.  With 
Vattemare  he  visited  Lafayette's  grave  in  Picpus  Cemetery,  a 
small  burying-ground  in  the  suburbs  of  Paris,  where  no 
common  dust  was  permitted  to  lie,  all  who  were  buried  there 
being  of  the  ancient  nobility  of  France.  Vattemare  also  took 
him  to  a  creche,  where  the  little  children  of  laborers  were  kept 
during  the  day. 

He  met  Guizot,  the  historian,  at  breakfast,  by  invitation  of 
1ST.  W.  Senior,  one  of  Sumner's  English  friends  and  correspond 
ents,  who  was  now  in  Paris.  At  this  breakfast  were  also  De 
Tocqueville  and  Lord  Granville.  Guizot  afterwards  expressed 
to  M.  Vattemare,  a  desire  to  receive  Sumner  and  they  called  on 
him  together.  They  found  the  historian  in  a  small  room  whose 
walls  were  covered  with  books,  except  where  there  was  a  space 
for  four  pictures,  Washington's  and  Hamilton's  being  two  of 
them.  Guizot  remarked  to  Sumner  that  no  other  nation  had 
been  cradled  by  men  of  such  high  character  as  the  United 
States.  Sumner  was  impressed  with  the  appearance  of  Guizot, 
whom  he  described  as  "prepossessing  and  his  conversation 
eloquent."  Guizot  expressed  to  Sumner  his  sympathy  for  him 
and  his  own  opposition  to  slavery. 

Sumner's  health  seemed  to  improve,  but  he  was  still  far 
from  being  well.  The  new  scenes  and  faces,  with  the  excite 
ment  of  travel,  withdrew  his  mind  from  the  excitement  and 
worries  of  his  official  position  and  the  events  in  which  he  had 
been  absorbed.  But  a  little  unusual  exertion  brought  the  old 
sense  of  weariness  and  want  of  strength  and  obliged  him  to 
seek  his  bed.  Time  and  again  the  diary  which  he  kept  ends  the 
day  with  some  reference  to  it,  "  home,  weary,  very  weary,"  the 
opera,  "  left  before  it  was  over  to  get  home,  to  go  to  bed,"  or  a 
dinner,  "  got  home  from  as  soon  as  he  could,  without  going 
elsewhere/'  Added  to  this  now  was  the  cold  he  had  contracted. 
For  whole  days  in  succession  he  kept  his  room,  except  when  he 
felt  obliged  to  go  out  to  keep  engagements  previously  made. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Some  days  he  was  not  out  at  all.  The  week  commencing  April 
twenty-first,  he  spent  almost  entirely  in  the  house. 

On  the  twenty-eighth  of  April,  he  received  from  the  Amer 
ican  merchants  residing  in  Paris,  as  the  agents,  on  that  side  of 
the  Atlantic,  of  their  American  houses,  a  letter  asking  him  to 
accept  a  public  dinner,  as  a  testimonial  of  their  admiration  of 
his  character  and  services.  Two  days  later  he  declined  the 
honor.  The  reference  to  himself  in  his  answer  is  important  as 
showing  the  condition  of  his  health  and  his  own  explanation 
of  his  reasons  for  coming  to  Europe : 

"  I  am  admonished,"  he  wrote,  "  by  the  state  of  my  health, 
which  is  yet  far  from  its  natural  vigor,  that  I  must  not  listen 
to  it,  except  to  express  my  gratitude.  In  making  this  excuse 
let  me  fortify  myself  by  the  confession  that  I  left  home  mainly 
to  withdraw  from  the  excitement  of  political  life  and  particu 
larly  from  all  public  speaking,  in  the  assurance  that  by  such 
withdrawal,  accompanied  by  that  relaxation  which  is  found  in 
change  of  pursuit,  my  convalescence  would  be  completed.  The 
good  physician  under  whose  advice  I  have  acted  would  not 
admit  that  by  crossing  the  sea  I  had  been  able  at  once  to  alter 
all  the  conditions  under  which  his  advice  was  given." 

Both  the  letter  and  the  answer  were  published  in  Galignani's 
Messenger,  a  Parisian  newspaper  printed  in  English.  The 
publication  called  forth  a  letter  to  the  newspaper  from  a  Vir 
ginia  planter,  also  present  in  Paris,  in  which  the  writer  in 
sisted  that  the  purpose  of  Sumner's  trip  was  not  health,  but  to 
organize  in  Paris  and  London  systematic  agitation  against 
American  slavery  and  characterized  the  action  of  the  American 
merchants  in  tendering  the  dinner  as  "  this  pseudo-patriotic 
partisanship,  this  unfraternal  display  of  their  sectional  colors 
in  a  foreign  land."  The  letter  showed  the  feeling  with  which 
Sumner  was  regarded  by  the  slave-holding  interest  and  how  his 
movements  were  watched.  It  showed  too  something  of  unkind- 
ness  when  exhibited  towards  a  sick  man  and  those  who  were, 
in  his  infirmity,  offering  him  an  attention  that  they  thought 
his  services  deserved. 

At  the  Institute,  on  May  second,  he  heard  Francois  Mignet, 
the  historian  of  the  French  Revolution  of  1789,  lecture  on 
Lakanal,  who  for  twenty-two  years  had  been  a  resident  of  the 
United  States,  and  for  a  time  President  of  the  University  of 
Louisiana.  Mignet  made  some  sallies  in  his  lecture  against  life 
in  the  United  States.  Upon  returning  to  his  room,  Sumner 
wrote  Mignet,  in  kindly  tone,  taking  exception  to  these  remarks, 
insisting  that  the  conditions  he  referred  to  only  obtained  in 
certain  localities,  and  that  it  was  not  fair  to  condemn  the  whole 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  355 

country  for  the  faults  of  only  a  part.  The  letter  called  forth  a 
visit  from  Mignet  to  Sumner,  two  days  later,  in  which  Mignet 
expressed  satisfaction  at  the  stand  Sumner  took  in  his  letter. 
A  year  later  Mignet  complimented  Sumner  with  a  ticket  to  his 
lecture  on  Schelling,  the  German  philosopher.  Their  friend 
ship  continued.  They  talked  together  of  history  and  literature. 

Alphonse  De  Lamartine,  the  poet,  historian  and  statesman, 
was  another  illustrious  Frenchman,  whose  acquaintance  and 
friendship  Sumner  enjoyed  at  this  time.  He  was  a  brilliant 
writer  and  in  the  Ee volution  of  1848  had  taken  a  prominent 
part  and  by  his  eloquence,  on  more  than  one  occasion,  had 
prevented  anarchical  outbreaks.  He  thus  acquired  much 
popularity.  He  was  the  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  of  the 
Provisional  Government  and  was  nominated  for  the  Presidency 
of  the  Republic  he  had  done  so  much  to  create,  but  his  popu 
larity  had  waned;  the  Eepublic  not  proving  so  great  a  boon 
as  had  been  expected  and  being  blamed  for  having  precipitated 
it,  he  received  but  few  votes.  "  Nobody,"  he  said  to  Sumner, 
"  could  anticipate  the  future  of  France.  With  a  people  so 
changeable,  nothing  was  certain  but  change."  He  had  realized 
this  in  his  own  career.  Sumner  and  Lamartine  met  several 
times  in  company;  they  dined  together  and  exchanged  calls 
and  he  invited  Sumner  to  visit  him  at  his  country  home. 

These  I  have  mentioned  do  not  comprehend  all  the  people 
Sumner  met,  but  they  are  the  names  that  occur  most  frequently 
in  his  diary  and  letters;  nor  have  I  mentioned  all  his  employ 
ments  or  all  the  places  of  interest  he  visited,  during  his  stay 
in  Paris.  My  purpose  has  been  to  show  how  he  employed  his 
time,  the  character  of  his  friends  and  the  nature  of  his  recrea 
tions.  From  what  has  been  said,  it  will  be  seen,  that  the  tastes 
of  his  young  manhood  still  prevailed.  His  love  remained  for 
pictures  and  statuary,  for  magnificent  buildings,  beautiful 
parks,  royal  palaces,  places  of  historic  interest,  what  was  rare 
and  curious  in  art  or  architecture  or  nature.  His  relish  for 
travel  continued.  And  he  liked  historic  characters,  men  of 
worth  and  attainments.  He  especially  enjoyed  the  society  of 
the  authors  and  scholars;  but  it  is  not  recorded  that  he  more 
than  once,  while  in  Paris,  entered  a  legislative  hall,  and  only 
once  a  court-room,  and  then  with  the  expectation  of  hearing 
Mairie,  a  member  of  the  Provisional  Government  of  the 
Republic,  try  a  case.  But  the  suit  was  continued.  All  in  all, 
it  was  a  pleasant  recreation,  mingling  rest  and  improvement, 
with  the  hope  of  health,  by  thus  withdrawing  the  mind  from 
its  accustomed  labor  and  excitements. 

He  drove  with  the  Appletons  to  St.  Cloud  where  they  dined 


356  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

in  the  open  air,  while  listening  to  the  music  of  a  band,  May  23. 
That  evening  he  packed  his  trunk  and  the  next  day  he  left 
Paris  for  a  tour  of  the  provinces,  hoping  that  a  change  might 
bring  improvement.  He  wished  to  see  France  elsewhere  than 
at  Paris,  where  he  had  been  for  two  months.  He  reached 
Orleans  on  his  journey,  about  noon  of  a  beautiful  day  after  a 
ride  through  a  charming  country.  Here  he  spent  the  after 
noon,  visited  the  chateau  where  Bolingbroke  lived  during  his 
exile  from  England,  walked  through  some  of  the  old  streets 
and  saw  the  house  of  the  great  French  jurist  Pothier  and  his 
monument  at  the  Cathedral.  In  the  evening  he  went  on  by 
rail  to  Blois,  where  he  rambled  about,  till  wearied.  After 
wards  he  attended  a  concert.  The  next  morning  he  was  awak 
ened  early  by  the  sunlight  streaming  into  his  room  and  rising, 
he  dressed  and  from  his  window  looked  out  upon  the  smooth- 
gliding  waters  of  the  Loire  and  the  sleepy  canal.  By  seven  he 
started  in  a  carriage  to  visit  the  castles  at  Chambord,  at  Am- 
boise  and  at  Chenonceaux,  three  of  the  most  famous  castles  in 
France.  He  returned  to  Amboise  for  dinner  and  then  went  by 
rail  to  Tours. 

The  next  day  he  went  to  its  museum,  its  library,  its  Cathedral 
and  rambled  about  its  old  streets.  In  the  neighborhood  he  also 
visited  the  Agricultural  and  Penitentiary  Colony  at  Mettray. 
It  was  the  reform  school  for  boys,  upon  the  family  system, 
founded  in  1840  by  Frederic  Augusta  Demetz,  whose  acquaint 
ance  at  Paris,  Sumner  had  made  in  1838.  He  was  then  a 
Judge  of  the  Eoyal  Court  of  Paris,  but  resigned  that  posi 
tion  to  give  his  life  to  this  work.  The  institution  he  founded 
and  conducted  has  been  a  model  for  many  in  Europe  and  Amer 
ica.  He  continued  at  the  head  of  it  from  its  foundation  in 
1840  until  his  death  in  1873  and  when  he  died,  he  directed 
that  his  heart  should  be  buried  there,  though  his  body  was 
buried  at  Dourdan.  Sumner  watched  the  boys  in  confinement, 
running  about  in  their  wooden  shoes  and  was  impressed  with 
the  earnestness  with  which  Demetz  defended  their  use,  saying 
that  he  wore  them  himself  about  the  yard  in  winter,  that  they 
protected  his  feet  against  dampness  better  than  rubber  ones. 

Early  the  next  morning  he  left  Tours  for  Nantes  by  rail, 
stopping  at  Angers  to  visit  its  museum  and  library  and  chateau, 
seeing  en  route  the  old  castle  of  Giles  de  Rais,  a  powerful 
Baron,  infamous  for  the  number  of  his  wives  and  his  de 
baucheries,  believing  in  sorcery  and  ruining  young  persons 
of  both  sexes  that  he  might  attach  them  to  himself;  after 
wards  himself  burned  to  death  for  his  crimes.  On  his  life, 
hangs  the  story  of  Blue  Beard. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  357 

From  Nantes,  Sumner  returned  to  Tours  and  went  thence 
by  way  of  Poitiers  and  Angouleme  to  Bordeaux,  stopping  to 
visit  these  antiquated  towns  and  the  romantic  castles  on  his 
road,  travelling  much  by  carriage  and  meeting  the  ordinary 
experiences  of  a  traveller.  At  Dax  he  met  a  Frenchman  at 
breakfast  who  insisted  upon  knowing  his  age  and  his  business. 
At  Pau  he  enjoyed  the  Pyrenees,  capped  with  snow  on  June 
third. .  He  travelled  thence  to  Eaux  Bonnes,  a  fashionable  re 
sort,  on  the  outside  of  a  diligence,  the  road  constantly  ascend 
ing  a  mountain  pass,  by  the  side  of  a  rushing  stream,  his 
companion  a  priest.  Arrived  there  he  tasted  the  waters  and 
took  the  baths,  and  the  next  day  mounted  on  horseback,  with 
a  guide  also  on  horseback,  his  trunk  strapped  on  the  back 
of  another  horse  led  by  a  man  on  foot,  he  was  off  by  six  in 
the  morning  over  the  mountains  to  Argelles  where  he  ar 
rived  by  five  P.  M.,  "weary,  very  weary,"  and  gave  up  going 
farther  to  rest  at  the  pleasant  inn.  But  he  passed  a  night 
sleepless  from  fatigue  and  was  troubled  to  find  how  little  he 
could  bear  now,  compared  with  that  insensibility  to  fatigue, 
which  he  had  once  enjoyed.  He  was  obliged  to  give  up  trav 
elling  by  horseback  and  from  Argelles  to  Toulouse  he  went  by 
carriage  or  coach. 

From  Toulouse  he  went  to  Carcassonne,  the  finest  walled 
town  in  France.  A  day  he  spent  in  Montpellier,  then  a  day  in 
Dijon  and  another  at  Fontainebleau.  Here  he  went  through  the 
royal  palace,  a  favorite  residence  of  Napoleon,  in  whose  chapel 
was  pronounced  the  decree  of  divorce  from  Josephine ;  in  whose 
court,  he  kissed  the  French  eagle  and  bade  farewell  to  his  Old 
Guard,  on  his  banishment  to  Elba;  and  within  whose  walls  he 
signed  his  abdication  after  the  defeat  at  Waterloo,  when  his 
career  ended  and  he  left  France  forever  for  St.  Helena.  Here 
too  was  signed  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  by  which 
Henry  IV  had  granted  religious  toleration  to  the  French  Prot 
estants.  Sumner  drove  through  the  forest  containing  thirty- 
five  hundred  acres  belonging  to  the  palace  and  the  same  day  he 
rode  on  to  Paris,  thirty-two  miles  and  was  back  in  his  old  lodg 
ings  at  Rue  de  la  Paix,  after  an  absence  of  eighteen  days. 

He  remained  five  days  in  Paris  and,  on  June  16,  left  for 
England.  He  reached  London  by  ten  p.  M.  and  the  next  day, 
the  first  friend  he  met  was  Joseph  Parkes,  author  of  a  history 
of  the  Court  of  Chancery,  now  taxing  master  of  the  Court  of 
Exchequer.  They  dined  together;  and  the  next  day  he  saw 
Monckton  Milnes,  M.  P.,  afterwards  Lord  Hough  ton,  and  so 
for  seven  weeks  he  spent  his  time  in  London,  renewing  old 
friendships. 


358  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

The  nineteen  years  that  had  passed  since  his  first  visit  had 
wrought  many  changes.  He  was  then  a  young  man  of  promise, 
filled  with  high  hopes,  abounding  in  health  and  an  enthusiastic 
student.  He  was  introduced  by  Judge  Story  and  other  friends 
to  the  best  circles  of  English  society  and  his  merits  had  jus 
tified  what  they  had  said  of  him.  But  it  was  character  only  he 
had  to  offer.  He  brought  nothing  of  achievement.  Now  he 
came  a  man  of  ripe  judgment,  bringing  sheaves  gathered  in 
the  rough  struggle  of  the  years.  The  promise  of  the  first  visit 
had  become  the  realization  of  the  next.  He  was  now  one  of  the 
historic  men  of  his  country.  But  time  had  left  its  marks  upon 
him.  He  was  broken  in  health,  unable  to  work,  he  felt  like  an 
old  man  worn  out  and  in  search  of  health.  Instead  of  delight 
ing  in  exertion  and  incapable  of  fatigue,  he  faltered  in  his  steps 
and  in  the  midst  of  the  most  ordinary  effort,  was  often  obliged 
to  seek  his  bed  and  rest.  His  condition  was  a  source  of  regret 
to  friends  who  remembered  him  as  he  was  before. 

On  the  other  hand  he  saw  the  change  these  years  had  wrought 
in  his  friends.  Monckton  Milnes  was  "much  altered  since  he 
knew  him."  He  passed  some  time  with  Lord  Brougham,  "  very 
kind  but  old."  Lord  Macaulay  was  "  so  altered  he  did  not  know 
him."  His  old  friend  Robert  M.  Eolfe,  who  was  then  Solicitor- 
General,  had  grown  gracefully  gray  and  was  now  Baron  Cran- 
worth  and  the  Lord  Chancellor  of  England.  He  dined  with 
him  again  and  there  met  the  grand-daughter  of  Lord  Byron. 
But  Mrs.  Norton,  he  wrote,  was  "  as  beautiful  as  ever." 

It  would  be  unprofitable  to  follow  him  in  the  round  of  social 
entertainments.  His  former  friends  were  glad  to  see  him  and 
it  seemed  like  an  awakening  of  pleasant  memories  for  them  to 
pass  the  hours  together.  Older  grown,  with  less  of  hope  and 
more  of  care  and  of  the  stern  realities  of  life  upon  them,  it  was 
a  relief  to  recall  the  earlier  days.  He  made  some  new  friends, 
who  were  equally  kind,  among  them  William  E.  Gladstone  and 
John  Bright  and  the  Duke  of  Westminster  and  Wilberforce, 
the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  by  all  of  whom  he  was  entertained. 

The  extent  of  his  entertainment  during  the  seven  weeks  in 
London  may  be  seen  from  an  enumeration  of  some  of  the  places 
he  went  and  the  persons  he  met.  He  breakfasted  with  Senior, 
where  he  met  Lords  Glenelg  and  Hatherton,  Earl  Fortescue, 
M.  de  Lesseps  and  Merimee,  the  novelist  and  historian.  He 
declined  an  invitation  to  stay  at  Stafford  House,  preferring 
the  greater  freedom  of  quarters  of  his  own.  The  Duchess  of 
Sutherland  took  him  to  the  Crystal  Palace.  He  breakfasted 
with  the  Duke  of  Argyle  and  met  there  Lord  Aberdeen.  He 
dined  with  Lord  Granville  and  met  Lord  Clarendon.  He  at- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  359 

tended  a  great  party  at  Lansdowne  House  and  was  again  at 
Senior's  with  Lord  and  Lady  Monteagle  and  Eeeve,  the  editor 
of  the  Edinburgh  Eeview  and  translator  of  De  Tocqueville's 
"  Democracy  in  America ".  He  breakfasted  at  Lansdowne 
House,  where  he  was  seated  next  to  Lord  John  Eussell,  the  head 
of  the  British  Foreign  Office  during  our  Civil  War.  He  dined 
with  Lord  Hatherton,  where  were  the  Archbishop  of  Canter 
bury,  Lord  Lansdowne  and  the  Duke  and  Duchess  of  Argyle.  He 
breakfasted  with  Lord  Hatherton  with  Tocqueville,  Senior  and 
Lord  Aberdeen.  He  was  the  guest  at  dinner  of  the  Benchers  of 
the  Inner  Temple.  He  lunched  at  Argyle  Lodge  and  after  it 
the  Duke  and  Duchess  took  him  to  Professor  Owen,  the 
naturalist,  in  Kichmond  Park.  He  took  dinner  with  Mr. 
Ellice,  M.  P.,  where  he  met  Mr.  Dallas,  the  United  States 
Minister,  and  his  family.  He  lunched  at  Stafford  House, 
where  he  met  Dr.  Whewell,  Master  of  Trinity.  He  dined  with 
Mr.  Sterling,  where  were  Lord  Lansdowne,  Mr.  Ellice,  Lady 
Molesworth  and  Mrs.  Norton.  He  declined  an  invitation  to 
dine  with  the  Law  Amendment  Society  of  Greenwich,  with 
Lord  Brougham  in  the  chair.  He  passed  a  Sunday  at  Cliveden, 
the  villa  of  the  Duchess  of  Sutherland,  with  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford,  Gladstone,  Labouchere,  afterwards  Lord  Taunton,  and 
wife  and  the  Duke  and  Duchess  of  Argyle.  Lady  Labouchere 
took  Simmer  and  Gladstone  to  her  place,  Stoke,  where  he 
visited  the  grave  of  Gray,  the  poet,  and  the  manor  house  where 
Sir  Edward  Coke  died.  He  walked  with  Gladstone  two  miles 
to  the  railroad  and  enjoyed  his  conversation.  He  dined  with 
Lord  Brougham  and  met  Lord  Chancellor  Cranworth,  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Campbell,  Lord  Clanricarde,  Lord  Shaftesbury, 
Lord  Aberdeen,  Lord  Brougham,  Lord  Glenelg,  Duke  of  Wel 
lington,  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  Sir  John  Stevens  and  Mr. 
Parks.  He  breakfasted  at  Henry  Reeves,  with  the  Due  de  Ne 
mours,  Due  d'Aurnale,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Lord 
Stanley,  Lord  Hatherton.  He  dined  with  Mr.  Parkes,  where  he 
met  Jared  Sparks,  the  historian,  and  Charlotte  Cushman,  the 
actress.  He  was  made  an  honorary  member  by  the  Eeform  and 
Travellers'  Clubs.  He  dined  at  Lord  Belper's  with  Lord  Mac- 
aulay.  At  Dr.  Lushington's  seat  he  met  Lady  Trevelyan,  "  a 
most  agreeable  sister  of  Macaulay."  He  dined  with  Lord 
Wensleydale,  where  were  the  Lord  Chancellor,  Lord  Lynd- 
hurst  and  the  Argyles.  Lady  Mary  Fox  took  him  to  Holland 
House,  where  there  was  a  beautiful  open  air  festival.  He 
attended  a  lunch  at  Grosvenor  House,  where  the  company 
assembled  in  the  magnificent  gallery.  On  a  Sunday,  he  went 
to  Eichmond,  to  lunch  with  Lord  John  Eussell,  where  in  his 


360  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

pleasant  grounds  he  met  other  distinguished  people.  He 
visited  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  at  Addington  and  spent 
an  afternoon  with  him. 

And  so  the  list  runs  on.  These  are  not  all  but  they  are  suffi 
cient  to  show  the  attention  Sumner  received  and  the  wonderful 
number  of  his  friendships  among  the  really  great  people  of 
England.  His  English  acquaintance  was  always  a  source  of 
pride  to  him.  The  doors  of  such  houses  in  every  country  open 
slowly  to  strangers  and  it  is  evidence  of  his  worth  that  he  was 
so  generally  and  heartily  received. 

The  attentions  paid  him  were  a  tax  upon  his  strength. 
They  withdrew  his  thoughts  from  his  condition  and  from 
things  at  home,  and  so  far  their  effect  was  beneficial;  but  the 
continual  round  of  excitement  was  too  great.  He  found  him 
self  obliged  to  decline  invitations  he  would  have  been  glad  to 
accept  and  always  to  observe  moderation  in  his  exertions. 
But  he  afterwards  realized  that  he  had  gone  too  far. 

Aside  from  these  social  engagements  he  spent  the  time  in 
London  quietly.  He  did  not  undertake  general  sight-seeing. 
He  visited  the  Tower,  Westminster  Abbey,  the  British  Museum 
and  the  picture  galleries,  but  this  was  the  extent  of  it.  His 
interest  was  rather  in  men.  He  attended  sessions  in  the  House 
of  Commons  and  the  House  of  Lords  and  listened  to  speeches 
of  the  members.  He  was  more  in  their  society  and  less  in  the 
society  of  members  of  the  bar,  than  in  1838.  His  career  in  the 
Senate  accounted  for  this;  his  fame  had  preceded  him  among 
Members  of  Parliament  and  they  sought  his  acquaintance. 

He  left  London  on  August  fifth,  for  the  home  of  De  Tocque- 
ville,  an  interesting  chateau  three  or  four  centuries  old,  near 
Cherbourg,  where  his  friend  made  him  comfortable,  telling 
him  it  was  not  necessary  to  wear  a  white  cravat  at  dinner,  as  the 
country  life  of  France  was  less  formal  than  in  England,  etc. 
The  next  morning  he  spent  walking  over  De  Tocqueville's 
private  grounds.  In  the  afternoon  they  drove  together  to  the 
village  and  chateau  of  St.  Pierre,  situated  in  a  beautiful  park, 
the  ancestral  home  of  the  Abbe  St.  Pierre,  well  known  for  his 
story  of  "  Paul  and  Virginia/'  They  were  home  to  dinner,  by 
seven  o'clock,  and  passed  the  evening  watching  the  ladies  play 
billiards.  The  day  following,  the  British  consul  at  Cherbourg, 
came  over  with  his  two  daughters,  to  pass  the  day  and  De 
Tocqueville  drove  the  party  to  the  village  of  Barfleur  and  to 
the  surrounding  heights,  where  they  could  have  good  views  of 
the  country.  The  excursion  was  pleasant,  but  was  interrupted 
by  a  shower,  which  caught  and  wet  the  whole  party.  On  the 
fourteenth  De  Tocqueville  drove  Sumner  to  Cherbourg  where 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  3(51 

they  were  taken  to  visit  the  breakwaters  and  the  docks  and  the 
harbor,  constructed  at  great  cost  by  Napoleon  I,  with  navy 
yards  and  dry-docks  and  impregnable  fortifications.  They 
dined  with  the  British  consul,  who  invited  some  friends  to 
meet  them.  In  the  evening,  after  a  pleasant  stay  of  three  days, 
he  returned  through  Bayeux  and  Caen,  to  Paris,  where  he 
arrived  on  the  sixteenth  of  August. 

He  found  the  family  of  Hamilton  Fish  had  just  arrived 
from  New  York,  and  visited  them  in  the  evening  and  dined 
with  them  the  next  day.  But  on  August  nineteenth,  he  left 
Paris  again  for  a  trip  to  Turin  in  Italy.  Here  he  turned 
back,  crossing  the  Alps  again  at  Great  St.  Bernard,  spending 
a  night  at  the  hospice  with  the  monks  and  their  dogs  on  the 
mountains,  tarrying  at  Geneva  and  Lausanne  and  Heidelberg, 
and  descending  the  Ehine,  reached  London  September  nine 
teenth.  His  purpose  was  to  pay  some  visits  he  had  promised 
to  make  in  the  North,  before  his  return  to  America. 

The  evening  of  his  arrival  in  London,  he  went  to  Walton, 
eighteen  miles  away,  to  visit  Kussell  Sturges.  The  next  day 
he  returned  to  the  city  and  went  to  spend  a  night  with  the 
Lord  Chancellor,  Cranworth,  at  his  country  place,  Holwood, 
in  Kent,  once  the  home  of  William  Pitt.  Here  he  found  his 
old  friend  of  nineteen  years  before,  Henry  Hall  am,  the  his 
torian.  He  spent  part  of  the  next  day  with  Hallam  and  found 
time  was  making  sad  inroads  upon  him.  He  was  very  weak, 
unable  to  walk.  It  was  to  be  their  last  meeting. 

Sumner  went  from  London  northward,  stopping  at  Man 
chester  to  see  an  exposition  then  in  progress,  to  which  he  was 
admitted  to  a  private  view  on  Sunday. 

He  left  Manchester  September  twenty-ninth  to  visit  Harriet 
Martineau,  at  Ambleside,  in  the  Lake  region.  Her  house  was 
an  ivy-clad  cottage,  called  The  Knoll,  situated  at  the  edge  of 
the  village  and  near  the  head  of  Windermere,.the  largest  and 
most  picturesque  of  the  succession  of  beautiful  lakes,  in  which 
the  region  abounds.  The  scenery  was  rugged  and  wooded, 
interlaced  with  deep  ravines,  leading  down  streams  of  spark 
ling  water  over  beautiful  falls  and  dancing  eddies  into  the  lake. 
Clusters  of  little  islands  rose  out  of  the  smooth  surface  of  the 
lake,  showing  with  their  cottages,  pretty  glimpses  of  shade  and 
lawn.  The  region  was  sprinkled  with  homes  of  people,  who 
loving  nature  had  added  their  work  and  frequently  the  charm 
of  their  names  to  her  profusion  to  make  the  region  still  more 
attractive. 

Miss  Martineau  he  had  known  since  1835.  They  met  when 
she  was  travelling  in  the  United  States,  preparatory  to  writing 


362  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

her  "  Society  in  America  ".  She  was  then  attracted  to  the  sub 
ject  of  slavery  and  had  become  an  abolitionist  and  continued 
her  interest  in  the  subject  till  it  finally  prevailed.  She  did  not 
hesitate  to  lend  the  aid  of  her  pen  to  the  cause,  even  to  the  prej 
udice  of  her  popularity  as  an  author.  Sumner,  at  the  time  he 
first  made  her  acquaintance,  had  not  shown  an  unusual  in 
terest  in  the  subject,  though  she  noted  him  as  strongly  dis 
approving  the  conduct  of  the  pro-slavery  mobs  and  resolved  to 
set  his  face  against  such  demonstrations.  After  the  commence 
ment  of  his  career  she  followed  him  with  sympathetic  inter 
est  and  when  they  met  in  London,  he  promised  to  visit  her  at 
The  Knoll.  He  was  now  redeeming  this  promise. 

He  spent  a  day  and  evening  there,  discussing  old  friends 
and  anti-slavery  affairs  in  America.  He  went  from  there  to 
Westhoe  Hall,  at  South  Shields  to  visit  Eobert  Ingham,  stop 
ping  by  the  way  for  a  couple  of  hours  at  Brougham  Hall,  where 
he  had  visited  in  1838,  and  where  he  was  pressed  to  stay  longer 
now  but  declined,  promising  to  stop,  however,  on  his  return. 
Eobert  Ingham  who  for  twenty-five  years  represented  South 
Shields  in  Parliament,  after  being  educated  at  Oxford  and 
called  to  the  bar,  though  not  brilliant,  either  in  his  profession 
or  in  Parliament,  was  a  man  of  great  worth  and  kindness  of 
heart.  When  he  retired  from  Parliament,  his  friends  by  pub 
lic  subscription  built  an  infirmary  as  a  fitting  testimonial  to 
his  character.  Sumner  wrote  him  that  "  such  a  monument 
was  better  than  a  statue."  Though  Simmer's  senior  in  years, 
a  warm  friendship  had  grown  up  between  them  on  his  former 
trip  and  they  had  since  corresponded.  The  similarity  of  their 
employments  and  their  tastes  drew  them  together,  Sumner 
appreciating  Ingham's  worth  and  Ingham  sympathizing  en 
tirely  with  Sumner's  work  for  Abolition.  Sumner  arrived  at 
Westhoe  Hall  Friday  evening  and  remained  until  Monday. 
The  only  entry  he  made  in  his  diary,  the  day  after  his  arrival 
is :  "  Eambled  about  hoping  to  recognize  old  spots,  which  I 
had  known  nineteen  years  ago;  company  to  dinner." 

From  Westhoe  Hall,  Sumner  went  for  a  day  with  Lord  Chief 
Justice  Campbell.  When  Sumner  knew  him  in  1838  he  was  the 
Attorney-General ;  and  later  he  was  Lord  Chancellor.  He  is 
well  known  for  his  Lives  of  the  Chief  Justices  and  the  Lord 
Chancellors.  Sumner  spent  the  day  talking  and  walking  with 
him  in  his  grounds  and  returned  to  Edinburgh  in  the  evening. 

He  left  Edinburgh,  October  eighth,  to  visit  Edward  Ellice 
who  represented  Coventry  in  Parliament  for  more  than  forty 
years  and  was  at  one  time  Secretary  of  War  and,  at  another, 
Joint  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  Sumner  had  also  met  him  on 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  3G3 

his  former  trip.  He  was  now  at  Glenquoich,  a  distant  retreat 
in  the  midst  of  the  Highland  lakes  and  mountains.  He  went 
by  way  of  Kothesay  and  the  Crinan  and  Caledonian  Canals 
to  the  mouth  of  Glengarry  and  then  by  gig  and  dog-cart  to  the 
retreat  of  his  host.  He  remained  for  two  days  in  this  romantic 
region. 

"  I  am  here/'  he  wrote,  "  farther  north  then  lona  and  Staffa, 
beyond  Morven  and  near  the  Isle  of  Skye,  where  Flora  Mac- 
donald  sheltered  Charles  Edward.  There  is  no  family  living 
within  forty  or  fifty  miles  of  the  friend  whose  guest  I  now  am, 
and  whose  estate  stretches  for  miles  and  miles.  In  front  of  the 
window  at  which  I  write  are  the  hills  of  the  immense  posses 
sions  of  Lochiel.  I  am  away  from  American  papers  and  with 
out  letters/' 

On  October  twelfth,  early  in  the  morning  he  set  out  for  Dun- 
robin  Castle,  the  seat  of  the  Duke  of  Sutherland.  He  reached 
the  Caledonian  Canal  by  dogcart,  at  Fort  Augustus.  Thence 
the  steamer  carried  him  through  the  canal  to  Inverness,  be 
fore  dark.  After  dinner  and  a  walk  about  the  streets  of  the  old 
capital  of  the  Highlands,  he  threw  himself  on  a  bed,  at  the 
inn  and  rested  till  half-past  eleven  o'clock,  when  he  took  the 
mail  coach  for  an  all-night  ride.  At  eight  o'clock  the  next 
morning  he  reached  Golspie,  the  nearest  town  to  'Dunrobin, 
where  he  found  a  carriage  from  the  Castle  awaiting  his  arrival. 
A  farther  ride  of  a  mile  brought  him  to  his  destination.  He 
immediately  went  to  bed  to  recover  his  lost  sleep  and  did  not 
appear  till  lunch  at  two  o'clock.  After  lunch  they  walked  in 
the  grounds  and  at  the  Duchess's  request  he  planted  a  tree,  a 
Mount  Atlas  cedar.  She  was  the  sister  of  Lord  Morpeth  and 
was  Sumner's  correspondent  till  her  death  in  1868.  Sumner 
had  met  her  in  1838  and  was  greatly  impressed  with  her  beauty 
and  her  religious  character.  "  She  is,"  he  wrote  Judge  Story, 
"  wonderfully  beautiful ;  I  think  even  more  so  than  Mrs.  Nor 
ton."  She  it  was  who  brought  Sumner  and  Gladstone  together 
and  paved  a  way  for  the  friendship  between  them. 

Dunrobin  Castle  is  an  ancient  seat,  some  parts  of  it  having 
been  built  as  a  fortress  as  early  as  1097  and  the  estate  with  it 
comprises  many  acres.  While  Sumner  was  there,  Lords  Blan- 
tyre,  Grosvenor,  Bagot  and  Stafford,  with  their  wives,  were  also 
guests  at  the  Castle.  They  had  dinner  at  eight  o'clock  and 
afterwards,  with  the  children,  they  engaged  in  a  game  of  post, 
a  kind  of  blind  man's  buff.  The  next  day  they  breakfasted  at 
ten  and  then  rambled  about  the  grounds.  The  Duke  and  some 
of  the  family  were  going  to  Inverness  and  they  all  went  aboard 
the  yacht  to  see  them  off;  and  afterward  the  Duchess  with 


364  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

four  horses  and  an  outrider  drove  them  up  the  mountain  to 
enjoy  the  splendid  atmosphere  and  the  beautiful  scenery.  The 
next  morning  there  were  prayers  by  the  Duchess. 

The  custom  of  religious  worship,  one  of  the  most  beautiful 
of  the  country,  Sumner  mentioned  as  commonly  observed  in 
the  great  houses  where  he  visited,  daily  prayers  in  the  morn 
ing  attended  by  all  the  members  of  the  great  establishment, 
from  the  highest  to  the  lowest.  They  met  in  the  great  hall  or 
chapel  and  with  bowed  heads,  in  a  simple  service,  led  by  the 
head  of  the  house  or  the  lady,  they  acknowledged  their  depend 
ence  upon  God  and  asked  His  guidance  and  His  blessing.  It 
was  a  sincere  acknowledgment  and  a  touching  admission  by 
those  in  high  places,  the  heads  of  these  houses,  of  their  de 
pendence  upon  another  and  a  Higher  Being,  whose  protection 
was  over  all.  By  example,  it  taught  those  under  them,  humility 
and  obedience.  It  seemed  nothing  contributed  more  to  the 
spirit  of  contentment  and  happiness  and  love  of  order 
so  marked  in  the  atmosphere  of  these  great  establishments, 
than  this  simple  and  heartfelt  exercise  of  religion. 

On  leaving  the  Duchess  drove  Sumner  four  miles  to  his 
steamer;  and  he  went  on  by  way  of  Burghhead,  Elgin,  Keith 
and  Old  Meldrum  to  Haddo  House,  the  seat  of  the  Earl  of  Aber 
deen.  The  Queen  had  only  left  her  Highland  home,  Balmoral 
Castle,  nearby,  the  day  before.  The  family  were  alone  and 
Sumner  spent  the  next  day,  Saturday,  with  the  Earl,  viewing 
his  grounds  and  in  a  visit  to  Balmoral  Castle.  Sunday  they 
went  to  the  kirk,  two  miles  away,  in  the  morning,  and  heard 
prayers  and  a  Presbyterian  sermon ;  and  he  spent  the  remainder 
of  the  day  with  the  Earl  quietly  walking  and  talking. 

He  left  Haddo  House  Monday  morning  and  the  same  day 
reached  Sir  William  Stirling's  place  at  Keir,  for  dinner  and  "  a 
pleasant  evening."  Wednesday  morning,  Sumner  left  Keir 
by  the  post  for  Callander  and  passing  through  the  Trossachs, 
he  crossed  Loch  Katrine  in  an  open  boat  and,  in  this  country 
of  alternate  rain  and  sunshine,  he  recorded  that  he  encountered 
two  severe  rain  squalls,  in  the  short  passage  of  ten  miles. 

The  author  remembers  retracing  with  his  wife  the  route  fol 
lowed  by  Sumner.  They  fell  in  with  three  bright  and  interest 
ing  Scottish  girls  as  fellow  travellers,  on  the  little  steamer,  On 
Loch  Lomond.  They  were  each  armed  with  a  heavy  plaid,  a 
stout  staff  and  strong  shoes,  and  were  bound  on  an  excursion 
through  Loch  Lomond  and  Loch  Katrine  and  to  the  top  of  Ben 
Venue,  and  then  back  to  Loch  Lomond,  all  the  way  on  foot, 
except  where  the  boats  sailed.  At  Inversnaid,  where  the  boat 
was  left,  waiting  to  ride  by  coach  to  Loch  Katrine,  a  distance 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  365 

of  six  miles,  they  by  walking  got  the  start,  but  were  soon  over 
taken,  in  the  midst  of  one  of  these  violent  squalls  of  rain,  trudg 
ing  along  at  the  side  of  the  stone  road,  under  their  heavy  plaids, 
laughing  at  the  rain.  We  saw  them  again  at  Stronachlacher 
pier  on  Loch  Katrine,  none  the  worse  of  their  walk  or  their 
wetting,  good-humoredly  laughing  at  the  "  leaky  weather  "  of 
their  country,  but  full  of  hearty  love  for  its  always  fresh  and 
romantic  scenery. 

It  is  quite  natural  for  the  Scots  to  love  their  island  home  for 
few  countries  have  more  picturesque  and  enchanting  scenes. 
The  Lochs,  Lomond  and  Katrine,  are  beautiful  sheets  of  clear 
water,  embedded  among  hills  and  mountains  and  studded  with 
romantic  islands  covered  with  foliage  which  reaches  down  to  the 
water's  edge.  These  mountains  are  not  towering  like  the  Alps, 
for  the  highest,  Ben  Lomond,  is  little  more  than  three  thousand 
feet  in  height;  but  they  are  covered  with  a  dense  growth  of 
small  timber;  kept  green  by  constant  showers  and  mists,  and 
rise  roll  above  roll  in  all  sorts  of  fantastic  shapes,  producing 
a  charming  effect  to  the  eye.  There  are  romantic  glens  and 
waterfalls  and  prim  little  villages,  which  dot  the  sides  of  the 
lakes  and  frowning  headlands  and  ivy  grown  walls,  which 
call  to  recollection  scenes  of  dim  days  that  are  past.  It  is  a 
region  of  romance,  sprinkled  over  with  all  sorts  of  interesting 
legends.  Sumner  easily  loitered  among  such  scenes. 

After  passing  through  Loch  Katrine,  he  drove  to  Inversnaid 
on  Loch  Lomond  and  then  went  down  the  lake  to  Tarbert, 
then  by  post  through  Glencoe  to  Inverary  Castle,  the  seat  of 
the  Duke  of  Argyll,  the  head  of  the  Scottish  family  of  Camp 
bell,  where  he  arrived  on  the  evening  of  October  twenty-first. 
The  Duke  and  Duchess  were  expecting  him.  She  was  the 
daughter  of  the  Duchess  of  Sutherland  whom  Sumner  had  just 
visited  at  Dunrobin  Castle  and  a  niece  of  his  friend,  formerly 
Lord  Morpeth,  now  Earl  of  Carlisle,  whom  he  was  soon  to  visit. 
They  were  all  Sumner's  friends  and  correspondents  and  con 
tinued  so  until  they  were  separated  by  death.  They  were  ar 
dently  anti-slavery  in  sentiment  and  their  letters  to  Sumner 
were  frequent  and  full  of  encouragement.  During  the  Civil 
War,  the  Duke  of  Argyll,  whom  he  was  now  visiting,  was  a 
member  of  the  British  Government  and  the  only  one  who  could 
be  said  to  be  entirely  in  sympathy  with  the  North. 

Sumner  remained  at  Inverary  Castle  two  days.  The  first 
was  spent  in  driving  with  the  Duke  and  Duchess  through  the 
forests  and  plantations  of  Inverary;  the  second  he  planted,  at 
their  request  two  trees,  an  oak  and  a  pine.  Both  grew,  and 
years  afterwards  were  mentioned  in  their  correspondence,  as 


366  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

pleasant  reminders  of  his  visit.  He  went  with  the  family,  to 
the  other  side  of  Loch  Pyne,  on  which  the  Castle  is  situated, 
to  visit  the  children  of  the  Duke  and  Duchess,  who  happened 
to  be  from  home.  The  third  day  he  bade  them  good-bye  and 
went  on  to  Glasgow. 

From  Glasgow  he  went  to  Penrith  to  visit  Lord  Brougham. 
His  carriage  was  waiting  for  him,  at  the  station  and  in  it  he 
reached  Brougham  Hall  early  in  the  afternoon.  After  lunch, 
he  and  Lord  Brougham,  walked  together,  and  later  Lady 
Brougham  took  him  to  drive  through  Lowther  Park.  Several 
guests  were  present  for  dinner  and  spent  the  evening.  Sumner 
was  interested  in  a  death  mask  of  Pitt,  which  Lord  Brougham 
had  among  his  art  treasures.  He  presented  Sumner  with  a 
colored  print  of  Edmund  Burke  as  a  youth,  a  copy  of  a  picture 
by  Reynolds,  which  Sumner  retained  till  his  death  and  then  be 
queathed  to  the  Boston  Art  Museum. 

He  left  Brougham  Hall  the  next  morning  to  visit  W.  E.  Fos 
ter,  M.  P.,  near  Leeds.  He  and  John  Bright  and  Eichard  Cob- 
den  were  the  three  members  of  the  House  of  Commons  who 
stood  by  the  North,  in  the  American  Civil  War.  They  had  al 
ready  been  watching  events  in  the  United  States  with  inter 
est.  Sumner  reached  Wharfside,  the  home  of  Foster  in  the 
afternoon.  Edward  Baines  of  the  Leeds  Mercury  was  invited 
to  dine  with  him  and  several  guests  were  present  at  breakfast 
the  next  morning.  At  eleven  o'clock,  he  left  Wharfside. 

He  went  to  Castle  Howard,  near  Malton,  the  seat  of  the 
Earl  of  Carlisle,  stopping  on  the  way  at  York  long  enough 
to  see  its  famous  Minster. 

Sumner  spent  three  days  at  Castle  Howard.  Only  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Earl's  family  were  there,  his  mother  now  disabled 
by  paralysis  and  near  her  death,  his  sister  Lady  Caroline  Las- 
celles,  and  her  three  daughters  all  at  the  time  unmarried,  and 
Lady  Elizabeth  Grey,  another  sister,  and  her  husband  Rev. 
Francis  Grey.  The  days  were  all  pretty  much  the  same.  Sum 
ner  and  the  Earl  were  warm  friends ;  neither  had  married  and 
so  the  cares  of  a  family  had  never  separated  them.  The  long 
years  since  they  met  had  been  covered  by  a  frequent  corre 
spondence  and  each  had  followed  the  career  of  the  other,  so 
that  now  they  had  many  things  to  talk  over.  And  it  was  in 
walking  and  talking  and  rambling  about  the  Castle,  viewing  the 
pictures  together  that  the  time  was  spent.  The  Castle  had  a 
celebrated  collection  of  paintings  by  Titian,  Rubens,  Reynolds 
and  other  masters,  sculptures,  bronzes,  tapestries  and  old  glass 
and  a  beautiful  park.  At  the  Earl's  request  Sumner,  soon  after 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  357 

this,  sent  him  a  crayon  portrait  of  himself  by  William  W. 
Story  which  still  hangs  in  the  Castle. 

Morpeth  wrote  of  their  intimacy :  "  In  our  past  hours  of 
friendly  intercourse,  in  our  frequent  walks  by  the  sparkling 
estuary  of  Boston,  or  upon  the  sunny  brow  of  Bunker  Hill,  how 
little  did  I,  how  little  did  he,  I  feel  well  assured,  dream  of 
such  an  opening  upon  his  quiet  and  unostentatious  career ! " 
And  Sumner  left  a  record  of  their  friendship,  when  he  wrote 
his  brother,  CJiarles  Howard,  after  the  Earl's  death :  "  Let  me 
confess  that  from  the  beginning  I  felt  for  him  a  peculiar  friend 
ship,  and  he  seemed  to  feel  the  same  for  me.  While  I  was  an 
invalid  his  sympathy  was  complete  and  constant.  I  cannot  for 
get  his  letters  then.  For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  this 
friendship  has  been  to  me  a  treasure  and  a  solace.  It  is  now 
gone;  and  England  with  which  he  was  so  much  associated  in 
my  mind,  seems  to  me  less  England  than  before." 

Sumner  left  Castle  Howard  on  the  morning  of  October  thirty- 
first,  Lord  Carlisle  rising  early  to  see  him  off  and  his  brother- 
in-law  Mr.  Grey  accompanying  him  as  far  as  Manchester.  He 
crossed  the  country  by  Crewe  to  Stafford,  where  he  took  a  fly 
and  drove  six  miles  to  Lord  Hatherton's  seat,  Teddesley  Hall. 
The  next  day,  Sunday,  they  drove  to  service  in  the  parish  church 
at  Penkridge;  and  in  the  afternoon  he  and  Lord  Hatherton 
walked  to  see  his  farm,  his  Hereford  cattle  and  his  draining. 
After  dinner,  at  the  close  of  the  evening,  all  the  domestics, 
twenty-five  or  thirty  in  number,  with  the  family,  assembled  in 
the  dining-room  and  Lady  Hatherton  read  prayers  and  a  short 
sermon. 

Monday  came,  a  rainy,  dismal  second  of  November,  when  all 
parties  were  glad  to  keep  themselves  housed  closely  in  from 
the  weather.  •  How  the  cold  wet  day,  late  in  autumn,  with 
falling  leaves  and  seared  meadows  and  other  evidence  of  ap 
proaching  winter  seemed  to  chill  every  living  thing  about  the 
great  house  and  make  all  cling  to  shelter  with  hearty,  though 
secret  thanksgiving  for  such  a  protection  from  the  storm !  All 
forenoon  they  remained  close  indoors  at  Teddesley  Hall;  but 
in  the  afternoon,  the  clouds  broke  and  Sumner,  with  Lady 
Hatherton  and  a  company  of  others  went  to  Stafford  where, 
following  his  interest  in  prison  discipline  they  visited  the  jail, 
kept  under  the  direction  of  a  governor,  who  was  formerly  a 
major  in  the  army.  The  governor  had  besides  the  recommenda 
tion,  more  appreciated  in  England  than  America,  of  belonging 
to  an  old  family.  They  also  visited  the  house  where  Isaac  Wal 
ton  was  born.  Though  dead  two  hundred  years  the  abounding 
grace  and  simplicity  of  his  "  Compleat  Angler/'  dear  to  lovers 


368  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

of  quiet  life,  seemed  still  to  cast  a  spell  around  the  quaint  and 
quiet  town.  After  strolling  about  the  streets  they  returned  to 
the  Hall  and  in  the  evening,  the  governor  of  the  jail  with  a 
Captain  Mackinnon,  an  acquaintance  of  Sumner,  came  in  for 
dinner. 

The  next  day  he  left  Stafford  to  spend  an  evening  witli 
John  Bright  at  Landudno,  near  Conway,  in  Wales.  He 
reached  Landudno  in  the  evening,  just  at  dark,  and  in  the  rain. 
Bright  had  engaged  rooms  for  him  at  the  hotel,  as  his  guest 
and  they  spent  the  evening  till  eleven  o'clock  talking  of  health 
and  politics.  The  next  morning  was  an  enjoyable  one  spent 
with  Bright.  From  the  acquaintance,  made  by  Sumner  with 
Bright  while  on  this  European  trip,  sprung  a  lifetime  friend 
ship.  They  became  correspondents  and  so  continued  till  Sum- 
ner's  death.  The  intimacy  was  of  importance  to  Sumner's 
country.  Bright  was  one  of  the  great  men  of  his  generation 
and  a  powerful  orator.  Being  a  leader  in  Parliament,  the  con 
stant  interchange  of  letters  between  himself  and  Sumner,  who 
was  for  many  years  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations  and  one  of  the  greatest  orators  of  the  Senate,  aided 
mightily  to  keep  the  hearts  of  the  two  great  English-speaking 
nations  right  towards  each  other. 

From  Bright,  Sumner  went  to  visit  the  other  great  Com 
moner,  William  E.  Gladstone,  at  Hawarden,  near  Chester.  He 
arrived  on  the  afternoon  of  November  fourth.  The  thick 
misty  weather,  so  common  in  England  during  this  season  of  the 
year  and  which  he  had  been  encountering  for  some  days,  still 
continued.  But  notwithstanding,  Gladstone  took  him  over  his 
grounds  and  to  show  him  the  ruin  of  the  old  Castle.  Gladstone 
was  at  the  time  engaged  on  some  volumes  on  Homer  and  the 
conversation  turning  upon  that  subject  they  found  themselves 
in  a  field  congenial  by  early  studies  to  both.  Sumner  had  spent 
many  years  in  the  atmosphere  of  Harvard;  while  Gladstone 
had  attained  an  unusual  distinction  at  Oxford  and  for  a  num 
ber  of  years  represented  her  in  Parliament.  Sumner  found  in 
him  the  same  eloquent  conversation  which  he  had  before  ad 
mired.  Similarity  of  tastes  and  of  employment  furnished  them 
many  topics  of  common  interest  and  the  hours  passed  easily 
between  them.  The  next  morning,  the  rain  still  continuing, 
Gladstone  took  him  to  drive  through  the  Park. 

Sumner  found  Chester  one  of  the  most  interesting  cities 
in  England;  many  of  its  buildings  very  old  and  in  the  restora 
tions  made  great  care  was  taken  to  preserve  their  ancient  ap 
pearance  so  that  it  presented  the  appearance  of  a  well-kept  city 
of  the  Middle  Ages.  He  visited  the  Cathedral  dating  from  1200 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  369 

and  walked  along  the  top  of  the  city  wall  which  afforded  the 
best  means  of  obtaining  a  general  view  of  the  city.  It  lies 
at  the  mouth  of  the  river  Dee,  a  small  stream  not  sufficiently 
large  for  ocean-going  vessels  yet  with  small  crafts  furnishing 
an  infinite  amount  of  pleasure  to  its  people.  In  numbers,  in 
pleasant  weather,  they  gathered  along  its  banks,  in  the  shade  of 
"  The  Grove/'  Its  old  mill  lazily  ground  away  by  the  river 
side*  as  perhaps  it  had  done  for  centuries.  Here  and  there  in 
its  neighborhood  where  its  wheels  churned  the  water  into  foam 
there  was  seated  some  ancient  angler  intent  upon  his  sport, 
just  as  perhaps  there  had  been  for  a  thousand  years  or  more  of 
the  history  of  the  quaint  old  town.  It  was  altogether  one  of  the 
attractive  scenes  of  the  home-life  of  "  Merry  England." 

At  Chester  Sumner  drove  to  Eaton  Hall,  the  seat  of  the 
Marquis  of  Westminster,  where  he  had  been  invited  to  visit. 
He  arrived  before  lunch.  The  Marchioness  met  him,  on  his 
arrival,  and  showed  him  through  the  house,  and  hospitably  took 
him  to  his  room.  It  was  again  drizzling  rain,  but,  not 
withstanding,  Sumner  visited  the  gardens  and  the  stables;  for 
aside  from  the  beauty  of  its  architecture  the  palace  was  justly 
famed  for  its  flowers  and  its  horses.  At  dinner  were  several 
persons  of  distinction,  besides  the  daughters  of  his  host,  gentle, 
well-educated  young  ladies,  sensible  and  unspoiled  by  their 
position. 

It  was  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon  when  he  reached  the 
Adelphi  Hotel  in  Liverpool  where  he  found  Eichard  Eathbone 
had  been  waiting  for  him  several  hours.  Sumner's  oration  on 
the  "  True  Grandeur  of  Nations  "  had  fallen  into  his  hands  and 
he  had  it  reprinted  and  circulated,  by  the  Peace  Society  of 
Liverpool.  Some  correspondence  and  an  acquaintance  between 
them  followed.  He  took  Sumner  to  see  the  city  and  afterwards 
to  his  home  for  dinner,  where  Sumner  remained  for  the  night. 
At  eleven  the  next  morning,  Mr.  Eathbone  drove  him  to  his 
hotel  and  then  to  the  pier,  and  at  three  p.  M.  of  November 
seventh,  Saturday,  he  sailed  for  home. 

The  voyage  was  not  a  rough  one,  the  first  days  were  even 
pleasant;  but  Sumner  suffered,  as  ever,  from  sea-sickness,  so 
that  November  seventeenth,  ten  days  after  starting,  when  they 
touched  at  Halifax,  he  wrote  that  he  had  not  taken  a  single 
meal  at  the  table  and  that  much  of  his  time  had  been  passed  in 
his  stateroom.  At  Halifax  he  went  ashore  for  a  stroll,  but  he 
soon  returned  to  the  ship.  They  set  sail  again  November 
eighteenth  and,  by  four  p.  M.  of  November  nineteenth,  reached 
the  wharf,  "  the  day  pleasant,  the  harbor  of  Boston  beautiful," 
he  wrote.  And  so  to  the  wanderer,  in  search  of  health,  after 


370  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  BUHNER 

eight  months  of  absence,  looking  forward  eagerly  to  the  re 
sumption  of  his  duties,  must  have  seemed  a  port  even  less  beau 
tiful  than  Boston. 

Sumner  was  met  on  his  arrival  at  the  pier  in  Boston  by  his 
colleague  Henry  Wilson,  with  N.  P.  Banks,  who  had  recently 
been  elected  Governor  of  Massachusetts.  They  drove  him  in 
their  carriage  to  his  mother's  home,  where  a  crowd  had  gathered 
in  the  street,  to  see  him.  In  answer  to  their  call,  he  spoke  a 
few  words  of  thanks,  before  entering  the  house.  The  next 
evening  he  attended  a  lecture  by  Banks  to  the  Mechanics'  Ap 
prentice  Association,  where  his  appearance  occasioned  loud 
applause,  which  continued  until  he  was  obliged  to  speak  a  few 
words  to  the  audience.  Soon  after,  when  he  attended  the 
inauguration  of  the  Governor,  he  was  welcomed  by  an  even 
greater  outburst.  He  was  in  his  seat  in  Washington,  when 
Congress  opened  in  December,  where  his  Free-Soil  associates 
were  glad  to  welcome  him;  but  the  pro-slavery  members  held 
aloof.  His  presence  was  everywhere  a  happy  omen  to  the 
friends  of  Freedom.  To  all  inquiries  about  his  health,  he 
answered  encouragingly,  but  his  physicians  still  forbade  him 
taking  an  active  part  in  the  debates. 

Congress  this  session  was  again  occupied  with  the  debate  on 
Kansas.  Her  fraudulent  Legislature,  meeting  at  Lecompton, 
had  drafted  a  constitution,  containing  a  clause  legalizing  Slav 
ery  and  it  also  had  in  it  other  provisions  oppressive  to  the 
Free  State  men.  The  people  were  not  given  an  opportunity 
to  vote  for  the  constitution  or  against  the  constitution.  But  if 
they  voted  at  all,  they  must  vote  for  the  constitution.  Their 
only  privilege  was  to  vote  for  the  constitution  witli  slavery,  or 
for  the  constitution  without  slavery.  But  if  they  voted  it 
without  slavery,  they  voted  it  with  all  the  other  oppressive 
provisions  remaining.  The  Free  State  people  naturally  refused 
to  go  near  the  trap  that  was  thus  laid  for  them  and  so,  when 
the  election  came,  they  declined  to  vote  and  the  constitution 
carried  by  a  large  majority,  with  slavery.  President  Buchanan 
immediately  on  the  opening  of  the  session,  sent  a  message  to 
Congress,  urging  the  admission  of  the  State  with  the  Lecomp 
ton  constitution. 

Douglas  was  a  candidate  for  re-election  to  the  Senate,  for 
his  term  was  just  expiring.  Seeing  that  to  support  such  a 
bill  as  proposed  would  be  fatal  to  his  prospect  of  re-election,  he 
promptly  opposed  it  with  all  the  force  of  his  forceful  nature. 
He  cared  not,  he  declared,  whether  the  Constitution  be  voted 
up  or  voted  down,  but  he  insisted  the  people  of  Kansas  should 
be  allowed  to  vote  for  or  against  it.  It  was  defeated  in  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  371 

Senate,  where  the  Democrats  were  largely  in  the  majority; 
but  in  the  House  the  result  promised  to  be  close.  Wm.  H. 
English  proposed  an  amendment,  giving  the  people  of  the  Ter 
ritory  a  right  to  vote  for  or  against  the  constitution,  but 
coupling  with  it  a  large  grant  of  land  if  adopted  and  postpon 
ing  state-hood  if  rejected,  thus  holding  up  to  the  people  of 
Kansas  a  bribe  to  induce  them  to  vote  for  the  constitution  with 
slavery.  The  bill  as  amended  passed  both  the  House  and  the 
Senate  and  was  approved  by  the  President.  But  when  the 
people  of  Kansas  came  to  vote  on  the  constitution  they  re 
jected  it  by  an  overwhelming  majority  and  thus  the  Free- 
Soilers  were  victorious. 

Perhaps  never,  in  the  history  of  this  country,  has  the  posi 
tion  of  a  public  man  attracted  more  attention  than  that  of 
Douglas  in  this  contest.  To  this  time  he  had  been  a  Democratic 
leader  and  a  prominent  candidate  for  the  nomination  for 
President.  He  had  made  great  sacrifices  to  secure  the  support 
of  the  South;  but  the  South  so  far  had  only  cultivated  him, 
as  it  had  cultivated  Webster,  to  destroy  him.  Believing  that 
the  opposition  of  Douglas  to  the  bill  had  defeated  the  admis 
sion  of  Kansas  as  a  slave  state  and  the  restoration  of  the 
equality  of  the  South  in  the  Senate,  a  hot  wave  of  popular 
indignation,  with  all  sorts  of  threats  against  Douglas,  passed 
•over  the  South.  The  North  cheered  him.  Many  Abolitionists 
belittled  his  act  by  interpreting  it  only  as  a  bid  for  re-election 
to  the  Senate  and  as  showing  no  actual  change  of  heart;  but 
realizing  the  good  work  he  was  doing,  they  smothered  this 
feeling.  In  the  storm  it  was  feared  that  Douglas  would  turn 
back.  Senator  Broderick  of  California,  equally  as  bold  and 
hardly  less  forceful  in  speech,  who  a  year  later  was  to  give  up 
his  life,  in  a  duel  with  Judge  Terry,  a  Southerner,  over  polit 
ical  differences,  encouraged  and  supported  Douglas.  Douglas, 
however,  was  not  the  man,  having  placed  his  hand  to  the  plough, 
to  turn  back;  and  he  never  did.  The  Republicans  nominated 
Abraham  Lincoln  against  him  for  the  Senate  and  the  mem 
orable  Lincoln  and  Douglas  debate  followed.  Douglas  was 
elected ;  and  Lincoln  became  President.  But  when  the  South 
rebelled  and  the  war  came,  the  last  blast  from  the  famous  old 
trumpet  of  Douglas,  that  had  led  in  so  many  fights,  was  lead 
ing  still,  for  the  Union. 

Sumner  watched  the  struggle  with  a  keen  interest.  None 
had  made  greater  sacrifices  for  this  cause  than  he  had  done. 
For  had  he  not  spent  weary  days  of  suffering,  when  death  itself 
would  have  been  to  him  a  relief?  And  the  end  of  it  was  not 
yet,  He  longed  to  take  part  in  the  debate.  He  felt  that  his. 


372  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

voice  wanting  would  be  noticed,  in  a  cause  for  which  he  had 
suffered  so  much.  He  wished  for  the  ability  to  speak  once 
more  with  his  old  time  vigor?  He  too  mistrusted  Douglas, 
thought  his  motive  selfish  but  was  willing  to  try  him,  knowing 
that  he  was  essentially  a  partisan  and  if  he  once  broke  com 
pletely  with  the  Democrats  he  would  necessarily  come  into  the 
camp  of  the  Eepublicans.  With  his  temperament,  neutrality 
would  be  impossible.  But  Sumner  cautioned  his  friends  that 
Douglas  had  not  reached  their  camp  yet.  He  desired  to  hear 
Douglas  speak  upon  the  Kansas  question,  but  he  was  forced 
to  deny  himself  even  that;  his  nervous  organization  was  so  sensi 
tive  that  the  excitement  caused  by  a  debate  upon  the  question, 
in  which  lie  felt  such  an  interest,  so  affected  him  that  he  could 
not  endure  it.  Even  the  surroundings  of  the  Senate  were  often 
too  much  for  him.  Sitting  there  a  weight  seemed  to  over 
spread  his  brain  and  he  would  be  compelled  to  stagger  out, 
feeling  like  a  man  of  ninety  years. 

He  soon  gave  up  all  effort  to  sit  in  the  Senate  and  arranged 
that  he  should  be  called  to  vote  upon  important  questions,  but 
otherwise  to  take  no  part  in  the  proceedings.  He  passed  his 
time  as  quietly  as  possible,  in  his  own  room,  reading,  or  in  the 
libraries  and  museums.  He  even  spent  part  of  his  time  as  far 
away  as  Philadelphia,  New  York  and  Boston,  going  to  Wash 
ington  only  when  his  vote  was  needed.  His  purpose  was  to 
have  politics  as  much  as  possible  out  of  his  mind  and  promote 
his  recovery  by  keeping  himself  quiet.  He  sought  by  other 
studies  to  accomplish  this  purpose.  With  this  view  he  com 
menced  the  study  of  engravings,  and  devoted  himself  to  it  with 
much  diligence.  He  was  thus  employed  during  the  winter  of 
1857-8,  while  in  Washington  at  the  Smithsonian  Institute,  in 
New  York  at  the  Astor  Library,  and  in  Cambridge  at  the  Har 
vard  Library,  in  all  of  which  places  there  were  considerable 
collections  of  engravings.  Thereafter  he  continued  it,  at  such 
times  as  his  health  permitted,  till  his  complete  recovery.  The 
subject,  which  thus  solaced  his  hours  of  suffering,  always  after 
retained  a  charm  for  him. 

At  the  end  of  his  life  he  recorded  his  own  experience :  "  Look 
ing  at  an  engraving,"  he  wrote,  "  like  looking  at  a  book,  may  be 
the  beginning  of  a  new  pleasure  and  a  new  study.  Each  per 
son  has  his  own  story.  Mine  is  simple.  Suffering  from  con 
tinued  prostration,  disabling  me  from  the  ordinary  activities  of 
life,  I  turned  to  engravings  for  employment  and  pastime.  With 
the  invaluable  assistance  of  that  devoted  connoisseur,  the  late 
Dr.  Thies,  I  went  through  the  Gray  collection  at  Cambridge, 
enjoying  it  like  a  picture  gallery.  Other  collections  in  our 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8VMNER  373 

country  were  examined  also.  Then,  in  Paris,  while  under 
going  severe  medical  treatment,  my  daily  medicine  for  weeks 
was  the  vast  cabinet  of  engravings  then  called  Imperial,  now 
National,  counted  by  the  million,  where  was  everything  to 
please  or  instruct.  Thinking  of  these  kindly  portfolios,  I 
make  this  record  of  gratitude,  as  to  benefactors.  Perhaps 
some  other  invalid,  seeking  occupation  without  burden,  may 
find  in  them  the  solace  that  I  did." 

He  pursued  the  subject,  with  the  same  purpose  and  interest 
that  an  art  student  would  the  study  of  paintings.  To  effec 
tually  withdraw  his  mind  from  politics  he  threw  much 
energy  into  it;  so  that  he  tired  out  others  who  undertook  to 
follow  him,  but  were  less  enthusiastic  than  himself.  He 
sought  to  know  what  engravings  had  merit  and  what  had  none. 
He  pointed  out  that  with  two  colors,  black  and  white,  and 
the  shading  of  one  into  the  other,  in  the  hands  of  a  skilful 
artist  all  the  merits  of  a  painting  could  be  produced  so  that 
the  engraving  presented  to  the  eye  the  effect  of  colors.  He 
insisted  that  it  required  no  less  skill  and  artistic  talent  to 
produce  the  one  than  the  other.  He  studied  the  lives  of  the 
engravers  and  pointed  out  that  the  best  engravers  had  been 
painters  of  equal  merit.  The  engraver  must  have  the  same 
knowledge  of  contours,  the  same  sense  of  beauty  and  power 
of  expression,  as  the  painter;  and  these  qualities,  with  the 
ability  to  use  them,  make  the  artist,  whether  painter  or  en 
graver.  Sumner  in  time  acquired  the  skill  to  detect  the  qual 
ities  of  an  engraving  with  considerable  accuracy;  but,  as  with 
paintings  his  ability  in  this  direction  always  had  its  limitations. 
He  never  acquired  the  ability,  for  example,  as  experts  do,  to  de 
termine,  by  an  inspection,  the  place  of  an  engraving  in  the 
order  of  impressions.  His  purpose,  however,  was  recreation. 

But  he  soon  found  that  with  all  he  could  do  to  avoid  ex- 
v--citement,  he  was  too  close  to  the  scene  of  activities  for  a  man 
in  his  condition.  Late  in  April  while  in  Washington,  in  his 
seat  in  the  Senate,  he  suffered  a  relapse.  The  pressure  upon 
the  brain  returned  with  increased  force,  attended  by  pains  in 
the  back  along  the  spine  and  lameness  in  his  legs  so  that  he 
could  not  rise  from  his  chair,  when  sitting,  without  intense 
effort  and  pain.  This  aggravated  condition  continued  for  a 
month  without  any  substantial  improvement.  There  was  no 
apparent  cause  for  it,  but  a  slight  over-exertion.  His  physi 
cians  were  consulted  and  they  advised  him  to  go  out  of  the 
country  again  and  away  from  excitement.  Some  of  his  col 
leagues,  Seward,  Wilson  and  others  who  witnessed  his  con 
dition  and  his  total  unfitness  for  work,  joined  in  urging  this 


374  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

advice  upon  him.  Sorrowfully  he  yielded  and  again  turned 
his  face  towards  Europe.  His  first  purpose  was  to  go  to 
Switzerland  and  get  exercise  on  foot  in  the  open  air,  commenc 
ing  with  such  moderate  exertion  as  he  could  endure  and  in 
creasing  the  amount  daily  as  he  hoped  his  strength  would  in 
crease.  He  sailed  on  the  ship  Vanderbilt  from  New  York, 
bound  for  Havre,  on  the  twenty-second  day  of  May,  1858,  just 
two  years  after  he  received  his  injuries. 

From  the  steamer,  on  the  eve  of  his  departure,  he  addressed 
a  letter  to  his  constituents,  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  in 
which  he  explained  to  them  the  occasion  and  purpose  of  his 
journey.  He  had  been  he  said  repeatedly  encouraged  by  his 
condition  to  believe  himself  almost  well,  but  had  been  as  often 
disappointed.  And  now  he  was  compelled  to  admit  that  in 
juries  so  serious  could  not  be  readily  cured.  In  the  hope  of 
complete  restoration  by  travel,  he  was  now  only  following  the 
advice  of  his  physician  in  going  abroad  again.  He  added : 

"These  valedictory  words  would  be  imperfect,  if  I  did  not 
seize  this  occasion  to  declare,  what  I  have  often  said  less  pub 
licly,  that,  had  I  foreseen  originally  the  duration  of  my  dis 
ability,  I  should  at  once  have  resigned  my  seat  in  the  Senate, 
making  way  for  a  servant  more  fortunate  in  the  precious  ad 
vantages  of  health.  I  did  not  do  so,  because,  like  other  in 
valids,  I  lived  in  the  belief  that  I  was  soon  to  be  well,  and  was 
reluctant  to  renounce  the  opportunity  of  again  exposing  the 
hideous  barbarism  of  slavery,  now  more  than  ever  transfused 
into  the  National  Government,  infecting  its  whole  policy  and 
degrading  its  whole  character.  Besides  I  was  often  assured  and 
encouraged  to  feel,  that  to  every  sincere  lover  of  civilization 
my  vacant  chair  was  a  perpetual  speech." 

His  letters  bear  ample  evidence  that  he  made  this  trip  to 
Europe  with  great  reluctance  and  compelled  by  what  seemed 
absolute  necessity,  if  he  did  not  wish  to  pass  the  remainder  of 
his  life  as  a  confirmed  invalid.  From  the  English  Channel, 
before  he  left  the  ship  he  wrote:  "I  wish  I  were  at  home.  It. 
is  with  real  reluctance  that  I  proceed  on  this  pilgrimage;  and 
nothing  but  the  conviction  that  it  is  the  surest  way  to  regain 
my  health  would  keep  me  in  it.  I  long  for  work,  and  especially 
to  make  myself  felt  again  in  our  cause.  The  ghost  of  two 
years  already  dead  haunts  me."  And  again  a  little  later: 
"  It  is  with  a  pang  unspeakable  that  I  find  myself  thus  ar 
rested  in  the  labors  of  life  and  in  the  duties  of  my  position. 
This  is  harder  to  bear  than  the  fire.  I  do  not  hear  of  friends 
engaged  in  active  service,  like  Trumbull  of  Illinois,  without 
a  feeling  of  envy." 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  375 

His  position  was  rendered  more  trying  by  the  insinuation  of 
Southern  members,  that  his  injuries  were  not  severe  and  that 
he  was  simply  dallying  away  his  time  in  European  travel  and 
loitering  in  picture  galleries,  while  giving  out  the  impression 
that  he  was  a  martyr  to  slavery,  all  for  the  studied  purpose  of 
creating  prejudice  against  their  institution. 

Chase  wrote  him :  "  It  is  amazing  to  see  to  what  depths  of 
baseness  some  of  the  partisan  presses  in  the  interest  of  the  Oli 
garchy  will  descend.  Not  content  with  half  vindications  of 
the  assassination  attempted  upon  you,  several  have  had  the  in 
finite  meanness  to  represent  you  as  playing  a  part  all  the  while 
you  have  been  suffering  from  the  effects  of  the  assault.  When 
will  men  learn  decency  ?  " 

Sumner  landed  at  Havre  June  1,  1858,  and  went  on  to  Paris 
the  next  day,  spending  the  night  en  route  at  Rouen.  His  pur 
pose  was  to  place  himself  under  the  care  of  some  eminent 
French  physician.  In  the  selection  of  one,  he  had  the  benefit 
of  the  advice  of  Dr.  George  Hayward  of  Boston  and  of  Mr. 
Henry  Woods,  an  American  merchant  residing  in  Paris,  and 
at  their  suggestion  he  saw  Dr.  Brown-Sequard,  an  eminent 
specialist  in  nervous  diseases.  He  made  a  careful  examination 
of  Sumner  on  June  10,  and  announced  that  his  trouble  was 
caused  by  the  direct  blows  on  the  head  and  indirectly  by  the 
reaction  of  these  blows  on  the  spinal  cord,  so  that  both  the 
brain  and  the  spine  were  affected  by  inflammation  and  ef 
fusion  of  fluid  producing  pressure  upon  both.  Sumner,  satis 
fied  with  the  diagnosis  which  had  lasted  three  hours  with  al 
ternate  applications  of  ice  and  hot  water  to  the  injured  parts,  at 
once  asked  the  Doctor  what  remedy  he  would  prescribe;  to 
which  the  answer  was,  fire.  The  Doctor's  purpose  was  to  pro 
duce  a  counter-irritant  and  thus  remove  the  inflamed  and 
unnatural  condition.  Sumner  asked  when  the  fire  could  be  ap 
plied  and  the  Doctor  answered  ee  To-morrow,  if  you  please." 
Sumner  asked,  "  Why  not  this  afternoon  ?  "  And  the  same 
afternoon  it  was  applied.  The  hope  of  regaining  strength  by 
exercise  was  at  once  abandoned,  as  arising  from  an  entire  mis 
conception  of  his  case.  He  required  absolute  quiet  instead  of 
exercise. 

The  application  was  made  by  the  moxa.  In  other  words  an 
inflammable  substance,  cotton-wood,  was  placed  along  the  spine 
and  in  that  position  it  was  set  on  fire  at  the  top.  The  fire 
burning  downward,  as  the  wood  was  consumed,  the  heat  grad 
ually  increased  till  the  back  over  the  spine  was  burned  to  a 
blister.  The  wound  was  then  dressed  and  cared  for  till  healed. 
The  applications  were  repeated  till  they  had  been  made  seven 


376  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

times,,  always  without  chloroform  or  other  drug  to  deaden  the 
pain.  The  Doctor  proposed  chloroform,  but  upon  Sumner 
asking  if  the  treatment  would  more  likely  be  successful  with 
out  and  being  advised  that  it  would,  he  promptly  decided  to 
endure  the  treatment  without  it.  Ilis  suffering  was  intense. 
He  sat  in  a  chair  during  the  first  application,  holding  the  "back 
of  it  with  his  hands  and,  in  his  agony,  he  wrenched  the  back 
so  severely  that  it  was  broken.  The  Doctor  wrote :  "  I  have 
never  seen  a  man  bearing  with  such  fortitude  as  Mr.  Sumner 
has  shown  the  extremely  violent  pain  of  this  kind  of  burning." 
The  treatment  occupied  six  weeks,  the  Doctor  visiting  him 
each  day  to  dress  his  wounds  or  to  renew  the  application  of 
the  moxa.  It  was  then  discontinued  to  await  the  appearance 
of  its  effects. 

The  moxa  is  used  only  in  rare  cases,  where  a  powerful 
counter-irritant  is  required.  It  causes  such  intense  suffering 
to  the  patient  that  its  utility  as  a  mode  of  relief  has  been 
gravely  questioned,  because  the  effects  of  the  remedy  are  often 
disastrous.  It  is  said  that  Dr.  Brown-Sequard,  seeing  the  ex 
cruciating  pain  it  caused  Sumner,  never  applied  it  again,  be 
lieving  the  agony  too  great  for  the  human  body  to  endure.  It 
was  during  its  application  to  Sumner,  that  he  first  experienced 
the  paroxysms  of  the  disease  of  the  heart,  angina  pectoris,  that 
fifteen  years  later  caused  his  death.  At  first  he  did  not  realize 
the  nature  of  this  new  trouble,  but  supposed  it  to  be  a  neuralgic 
affection  of  the  nerves  of  the  chest,  caused  by  sympathy  with 
the  nerves  of  the  spine.  It  was  thought  to  reduce  them  by  hot 
baths  and  powerful  internal  remedies.  But  their  recurrence 
continued  until  his  death.  Thus  the  moxa  by  creating  a  power 
ful  counter-irritant  removed  the  morbid  condition  of  the  brain 
and  spine,  but  it  probably  caused  the  angina  pectoris. 

It  has  been  gravely  questioned  by  some  of  Sumner's  friends 
whether  the  application  of  the  moxa  was  not  a  mistake.  They 
have  felt  that  some  other  treatment  might  have  secured  a  cure 
without  the  angina  pectoris,  which  they  believed  was  the  result 
of  the  treatment  given.  They  may  be  right.  But  Sumner  to 
the  day  of  his  death,  felt  a  grateful  obligation  to  Dr.  Brown- 
Sequard  and  was  satisfied  with  the  course  followed.  It  must  be 
remembered  that  his  injuries  were  of  a  very  serious  character 
and  that  if  a  cure  was  to  be  had  at  all,  which  for  a  long  time 
was  doubtful,  it  could  hardly  be  expected  without  leaving  some 
traces  behind  it.  As  it  was,  from  a  condition  of  helplessness, 
which  permitted  no  useful  exertion,  Sumner  was  restored  to  al 
most  perfect  health,  save  for  intervals  comparatively  brief, 
when  he  suffered  from  the  newr  trouble ;  and  fifteen  of  the  most 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  377 

useful  years  of  his  life  followed.  This  was  something  for  which 
he  and  humanity  have  abundant  reason  to  be  grateful  and,  so 
far  as  we  can  now  judge,  we  owe  it  to  the  radical  measures 
taken  by  Dr.  Brown-Sequard,  to  remove  a  radical  trouble. 

At  the  time  of  Sumner's  death  Dr.  Brown-Sequard,  then  liv 
ing  in  New  York,  was  engaged  in  delivering  a  course  of  six 
lectures  at  the  Lowell  Institute,  Boston.  His  fifth  lecture  was 
to  have  been  delivered  on  March  11,  but  a  hasty  summons 
called  him  to  Washington  to  attend  Sumner,  who  was  then 
dying.  On  this  account,  the  delivery  of  this  lecture  was  post 
poned  until  March  15,  when  the  Doctor  reviewed  his  treatment 
of  Simmer's  case.  What  he  said  is  worthy  of  a  careful  reading : 

"  When,  in  1857,  I  saw  Mr.  Charles  Sumner,  for  the  first 
time,  he  presented  to  me  at  once  symptoms,  which  I  could 
not  but  recognize  as  dependent  upon  an  irritation  of  some 
fibres  of  the  sympathetic  nerve,  and  a  paralysis  of  others.  As 
you  know,  he  received  a  terrible  blow  on  the  head.  His  spine 
as  he  was  sitting  had  been  bent  in  two  places,  the  cranium 
fortunately  resisting.  This  bending  of  the  spine  in  two  places 
had  produced  there  the  effects  of  a  sprain.  When  I  saw  him 
in  Paris  he  had  recovered  altogether  from  the  first  effects  of 
the  blow.  He  suffered  from  the  two  sprains  of  the  spine  and 
perhaps  a  slight  irritation  of  the  spinal  cord  itself.  He  had 
two  troubles  at  that  time.  One  was  that  he  could  not  make 
use  of  his  brain  at  all.  He  could  not  read  a  newspaper ;  could 
not  write  a  letter.  He  was  in  a  frightful  state  as  regards  the 
activity  of  his  mind,  as  every  effort  there  was  most  painful  to 
him.  It  seemed  to  him  at  times  as  if  his  head  would  burst; 
there  seemed  to  be  some  great  force  within  pushing  the  pieces 
away  from  one  another.  Any  emotion  was  painful  to  him. 
Even  in  conversation  anything  that  called  for  depth  of  thought 
or  feeling  caused  him  suffering,  so  that  we  had  to  be  very 
careful  with  him.  He  had  another  trouble  resulting  from 
the  sprain  which  was  at  the  level  of  the  lowest  dorsal  vertebra. 
The  irritation  produced  was  intense  and  the  result  was  very 
painful.  When  he  tried  to  move  forward  he  was  compelled  to 
push  one  foot  slowly  and  gently  forward  but  a  few  inches,  and 
then  drag  the  other  foot  to  a  level  with  the  first,  holding  his 
back  at  the  same  time,  to  diminish  the  pain  that  he  had  there. 
It  had  been  thought  that  he  was  paralyzed  in  the  lower  limbs, 
and  that  he  had  disease  of  the  brain,  and  the  disease  of  the 
brain  was  construed  as  being  the  cause  of  this  paralysis  of  the 
lower  limbs." 

"  Fortunately  the  discovery  made  of  what  we  call  the  vaso- 
xnotor  nervous  system,  led  me  at  once  to  the  conclusion  that  Jie 


378  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SVMNER 

had  no  disease  of  the  brain  and  had  no  paralysis.  He  had 
only  an  irritation  of  those  vaso-motor  nerves,  resulting  from 
the  upper  sprain  in  the  spine.  That  irritation  was  the  cause 
of  the  whole  mischief  as  regards  the  function  of  the  brain. 
The  other  sprain  caused  the  pain  which  gave  the  appearance  of 
paralysis.  When  I  asked  him  if  he  was  conscious  of  any 
weakness  in  his  lower  limbs,  he  said,  Certainly  not;  I  have 
never  understood  that  my  physicians  considered  me  paralyzed. 
I  only  cannot  walk  on  account  of  the  pain." 

"  What  was  to  be  done  was  to  apply  counter-irritants  to 
those  two  sprains.  That  was  done.  I  told  him  that  the  best 
plan  of  treatment  would  consist  in  the  application  of  moxas, 
and  that  they  produced  the  most  painful  kind  of  irritation  of 
the  skin  that  we  knew.  I  urged  him  then  to  allow  me  to  give 
him  chloroform  to  diminish  the  pain,  if  not  take  it  away  alto 
gether.  I  well  remember  his  impressive  accent  when  he  replied : 
'  If  you  can  say  positively  that  I  shall  derive  as  much  benefit  if 
I  take  chloroform  as  if  1  do  not,  then  of  course  I  will  take  it ; 
but  if  there  is  to  be  any  degree  whatever  of  amelioration  in  case 
I  do  not  take  it,  then  I  shall  not  take  it/  >: 

"  I  did  not  find  courage  enough  to  deceive  him.  I  told  him 
the  truth — that  there  would  be  more  effect,  as  I  thought,  if  he 
did  not  take  chloroform.  And  so  I  had  to  submit  him  to  the 
martyrdom  of  the  greatest  suffering  that  can  be  inflicted  on 
mortal  man.  I  burned  him  with  the  first  moxa.  I  had  the 
hope  that  after  the  first  application  he  would  submit  to  the 
use  of  chloroform ;  but  for  five  times  after  that  he  was  burned 
in  the  same  way"  (Simmer  says  seven  times  in  all)  "and 
refused  to  take  chloroform.  I  had  never  seen  a  patient  who 
submitted  to  such  treatment  in  that  way." 

"  I  cannot  conceive  that  it  was  from  mere  heroism  that  he 
did  it.  The  real  explanation  was  this:  Heaps  of  abuse  had 
been  thrown  upon  him.  He  was  considered  as  amusing  him 
self  in  Paris ;  as  pretending  to  be  ill.  In  fact  he  wanted  to  get 
well  and  go  home  as  quickly  as  possible.  A  few  days  were  of 
great  importance  to  him.  And  so  he  passed  through  that 
terrible  suffering,  the  greatest  that  I  have  ever  inflicted  upon 
any  being,  man  or  animal." 

Here  the  Doctor  broke  down  completely  and  was  obliged  to 
ask  the  audience  to  excuse  him  for  the  remainder  of  the  even 
ing,  though  he  had  only  spoken  half  the  usual  time.  The 
thoughts  of  a  dear  friend  now  no  more  and  of  the  terrible 
sufferings  he  had  endured,  under  his  advice,  to  insure  a  re 
covery,  completely  unnerved  him  and  he  was  unable  to  pro 
ceed  farther  except  to  add:  "  Since  1857  the  eminent  man  that 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  379 

has  left  us  has  been  under  my  care  and  has  been  also  a  very 
dear  friend." 

The  latter  part  of  August,  1857,  Sumner  went  to  Aix-les- 
Bains  under  the  advice  of  Dr.  Brown-Sequard  to  supplement 
the  treatment  by  fire  with  that  of  water.  The  baths  of  Aix  are 
famous  for  their  medicinal  properties.  The  water,  having  some 
medicinal  ingredients,  issues  from  the  earth  very  warm.  Each 
morning  it  was  applied,  by  alternate  hot  and  cold  jets,  to  Sum- 
ner's  back  and  chest,  where  affected.  When  he  was  thoroughly 
exhausted  by  this  treatment,  he  was  carried  wrapped  in  a  sheet 
and  blanket  to  his  hotel  and  put  to  bed.  After  a  rest,  he 
walked  for  exercise.  He  enjoyed  the  bath  with  the  rest  and 
absence  from  excitement  which  their  location  insured  him.  He 
was  among  entire  strangers  and,  except  once  for  a  day,  did 
not  see  an  acquaintance  during  the  three  weeks  he  remained 
there.  He  devoted  himself  entirely  to  recovering  his  health. 
"  The  country/'  he  wrote,  "  is  beautiful  and  the  people,  simple 
and  kind/'  The  time  passed  pleasantly  enough,  but  his 
lurking  fear  was  that  he  might  have  to  return  to  the  dreaded 
treatment  by  the  moxa. 

He  left  Aix  the  middle  of  September  and  spent  the  next 
two  months  in  travelling  through  Northern  Italy,  Austria  and 
through  Germany,  down  the  Rhine  to  Cologne.  He  was  back 
in  Paris  by  the  middle  of  November.  His  condition,  while  he 
was  thus  loitering  about  to  await  the  results  of  his  treatment, 
showed  substantial  improvement.  He  gradually  became  con 
vinced  that  he  was  at  last  on  the  road  to  recovery.  How  long 
it  would  take,  and  whether  farther  treatment  would  be  neces 
sary,  he  could  not  tell,  but  he  was  satisfied  that  his  physician 
understood  his  case  and  that  his  injuries  were  yielding  to  the 
treatment.  His  strength  was  returning.  He  could  take  long 
walks  without  the  recurrence  of  the  menacing  symptoms  he 
once  experienced.  Upon  his  return  to  Paris  Dr.  Brown- 
Sequard  was  gratified  with  the  progress  he  had  made  and  called 
a  consultation  upon  his  case  with  Dr.  Hayward  of  Boston  and 
Dr.  Trousseau,  an  eminent  French  physician.  They  approved 
the  treatment  and  all  agreed  in  advising  against  his  contem 
plated  return  to  the  United  States  to  be  present  at  the  opening 
of  Congress  in  December.  They  insisted  that  he  should  seek 
out  some  quiet  place  in  the  South  of  France,  out  of  the  way 
of  travellers  and  avoid  both  work  and  excitement.  Wilson  his 
colleague  united  in  urging  him  not  to  hurry  his  return,  but  to 
make  his  health  his  first  care. 

He  therefore  followed  this  advice  and  went  to  Montpellier  in 
the  south  of  France.  But  he  did  so  reluctantly.  In  returning 


380  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

from  England  before,  to  take  his  seat  in  the  Senate,  he  had 
disregarded  the  advice  of  Dr.  George  Combe  and  Sir  James 
Clark,  the  Queen's  Physician,  who  both  pronounced  him  unfit 
for  his  Senatorial  duties;  and  the  sequel  showed  that  they 
were  right  and  that  he  made  a  mistake  in  not  heeding  their 
warning.  He  was  cautious  now  not  to  repeat  his  indiscretion. 

He  remained  in  Montpellier  three  months,  constantly  under 
the  care  of  a  physician,  Dr.  Crouzet  to  whom  he  had  been  com 
mended  by  Dr.  Brown-Sequard.  The  direction  of  the  latter 
was  still  followed  as  to  the  treatment  to  be  given  him.  He  was 
to  spend  a  great  portion  of  the  time  each  day  on  his  bed  or  a 
sofa  and  be  treated  daily  by  cupping,  along  the  spine,  to  con 
tinue  the  withdrawal  of  the  inflammation  from  the  injured 
parts.  This  treatment  was  painful,  but  not  to  be  compared  to 
the  moxa.  He  avoided  all  excitement  and  undue  exertion. 
During  the  whole  time  he  was  at  Montpellier  he  saw  only  three 
or  four  persons  he  had  previously  known,  three  of  them  Amer 
icans  passing  through,  whom  he  enjoyed  only  for  an  even 
ing;  and  not  much  oftener  did  he  see  an  American  paper.  Of 
Montpellier  he  always  retained  pleasant  memories,,  recalling  a 
life  for  him  unusually  peaceful  and  happy  and  the  farthest 
removed  from  strife  and  contention. 

He  continued  at  Montpellier,  his  study  of  engravings.  He 
attended  lectures  at  the  University  and  was  invited  to  the  ses 
sions  of  a  learned  club,  which  met  weekly,  on  Friday  evenings. 
He  made  a  few  short  excursions  to  places  in  the  immediate 
neighborhood  and  enjoyed  the  acquaintance  of  some  scholars 
of  the  city.  In  his  intercourse  with  the  people  he  met,  he 
spoke  French  almost  entirely.  His  only  companion,  to  whom 
he  spoke  English,  was  a  retired  English  officer,  Captain  J.  R. 
Gordon,  who  was  making  his  home  in  the  city.  Gordon  had 
seen  a  varied  career  in  the  army,  had  served  under  Wellington 
and  was  a  delightful  companion.  He  was  Sumner's  most  in 
timate  friend  and  they  dined  together,  usually  as  often  as  twice 
each  week.  The  Captain  was  acquainted  with  the  French  offi 
cers,  who  commanded  the  garrison  in  the  city,  and  their  visits 
with  them  afforded  a  pleasant  recreation.  Sumner  continued 
a  correspondence  with  Captain  Gordon  till  his  death  in  1863. 
But  after  all  it  was  his  books  that  furnished  Sumner  most  of 
his  recreation.  To  one  friend  he  wrote :  "  Some  fifteen  hours 
out  of  the  daily  twenty-four  I  have  passed  on  my  back,  and 
have  always  begun  the  day  with  a  treatment  which  was  toler 
able  only  as  an  exchange  for  fire.  But  I  have  found  society 
and  solace  in  books,  which  I  have  devoured  with  my  ancient 
ardor.  No  prisoner  in  the  Bastile  ever  read  more.  God  be 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  381 

praised  for  this  taste,  or  appetite  and  for  the  returning  strength 
which  has  enabled  me  to  indulge  it !  "  To  another  he  wrote : 
"  How  often  I  think  with  gratitude  of  my  love  of  books,  which 
furnishes  me  in  my  retreat  such  hosts  of  truest  friends." 

Just  before  Sumner's  return  to  America,  in  a  letter  to  Cap 
tain  Gordon,  he  recorded  his  obligation  to  him  and  his  faithful 
Doctor  Crouzet,  as  well  as  his  tender  memories  of  Montpellier. 
"  And  now,"  he  wrote,  "  I  look  with  increased  longing  and 
tenderness  towards  Montpellier.  My  residence  there  in  such 
retirement,  compared  with  my  life  elsewhere,  seems  like  a 
fable  or  a  dream.  Most  truly  do  I  wish  that  I  could  repeat  it. 
I  need  not  say  how  much  you  contributed  to  make  it  agreeable. 
I  often  think  of  my  quiet  walks,  my  visit  to  the  library,  the 
lectures,  friends  and  then  my  weekly  repast  with  you.  I  trust 
that  my  excellent  doctor,  who  declined  all  fee,  has  a  long  list 
of  patients  who  pay  him  well."  Dr.  Crouzet  had  become  so 
much  attached  to  Sumner,  by  their  constant  association  during 
his  treatment,  that  he  refused  all  pay  for  his  services. 

Sumner  left  Montpellier  late  in  March  for  Italy,  making  con 
siderable  stays  at  Rome,  Naples  and  Florence.  At  Cannes  in 
the  south  of  France  he  met  Baron  Bunsen,  the  German  dip 
lomat  and  author,  and  Lord  Brougham,  who  had  a  chateau 
there,  where  he  spent  much  of  his  time  and  who  had  anticipated 
his  arrival,  by  a  note  cordially  asking  him  to  pay  them  a  visit. 
At  Rome  he  was  the  guest  of  William  W.  Story.  And  while 
there  he  met  J.  Lothrop  Motley,  the  historian,  and  Nathaniel 
Hawthorne,  the  novelist,  both  of  Massachusetts.  The  latter  was 
then  residing  in  Italy,  after  having  resigned  his  consulate  at 
Liverpool,  England,  '  and  was  writing  "  The  Marble  Faun." 
Sumner  visited  the  studios  and  talked  with  the  artists.  He  was 
at  St.  Peter's,  the  Vatican  and  the  galleries;  he  enjoyed  the 
Easter  festivities.  Everything  reminded  him  of  the  early  days 
when  he  saw  these  places  of  interest  with  such  fidelity,  under 
the  advantage  of  health,  and  of  boundless  hope  for  the  future. 
Of  course  he  could  not  forget  his  friends,  one  Crawford,  now 
dead,  who  in  that  happiest  summer  of  his  life,  had  opened  the 
beauties  of  the  Eternal  City  to  him.  How  he  longed  to  have  it 
all  back !  "  But  not,"  he  'added,  "  I  think,  on  the  condition 
that  I  should  live  the  intervening  years  over  again."  On  leav 
ing  he  wrote  Wm.  Story :  "  Rome  now,  as  when  I  first  saw  it, 
touches  me  more  than  any  other  place.  Then  I  have  been  so 
happy  with  you.  Perhaps  it  will  be  long  before  we  meet  again ; 
but  I  cannot  forget  those  latter  delicious  days.  God  bless  you  ! ' 

From  Rome,  Sumner  went  to  Civita  Vecchia  and  thence  by 
steamer  to  Leghorn  and  Genoa  and  then  by  rail  to  Turin. 


382  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Crossing  from  Turin  over  the  Alps,  he  hired  a  private  con 
veyance  at  a  cost  of  two  hundred  and  twenty  francs  and  made 
the  journey  alone  with  his  postilion.  The  country  was  full  of 
soldiers  concentrated  by  the  French  to  assist  an  uprising  of  the 
Italians,  against  Austria,  for  national  independence.  As  his 
train  entered  the  station  at  Alexandria,  the  depot  was  crowded 
with  them  so  that  the  train  seemed  to  cut  its  way  through  the 
living  mass  and  yet  he  remarked  their  good  behavior,  with  no 
where  a  sign  of  disturbance.  As  his  carriage  ascended  the  Alps, 
he  met  the  French  army,  the  lancers  riding  ahead,  all  well 
mounted,  in  double  file,  as  carefully  dressed  and  as  soldierly 
in  bearing  as  if  on  the  streets  of  Paris,  with  their  lances  borne 
upright  and  their  pennons  streaming,  presenting  a  splendid 
appearance.  As  his  driver  approached,  he  was  at  a  loss  which 
side  to  turn,  but  the  officer  in  command  cried  au  milieu,  au 
milieu,  and  the  ranks  opened  and  his  carriage  passed  on  up 
between  the  ranks,  Sumner  not  neglecting  to  tip  his  hat  to  the 
officers  as  he  passed,  who  in  turn  acknowledged  the  salutation 
by  taking  off  their  hats  or  giving  the  military  salute.  The 
lancers  past,  the  artillery  followed  and  then  came  the  troops 
of  the  line,  trudging  along  the  road,  with  here  and  there  some 
foot-sore,  half-sick  straggler  straying  from  the  ranks  or  sitting 
dejected  by  the  road-side,  perhaps  thinking  of  the  home  he  had 
left  and  the  loved  ones  his  eyes  might  never  behold  again. 
Upon  the  whole  it  was  a  deeply  interesting  sight  to  Sumner. 
The  day  was  charming  and  he  seemed  to  be  travelling  in  a  pic 
ture.  Enthusiast  as  he  was  in  the  cause  of  universal  peace,  the 
thought  of  Italy,  with  her  sunny  skies,  and  art  treasures,  the 
genius  of  her  children  and  her  long  and  often  brilliant  history, 
now  groaning  under  the  yoke  of  the  foreigner  and  struggling  to 
be  free,  enlisted  his  sympathy  and  he  confessed  much  of  the 
ardor  of  the  soldiers  in  the  cause. 

He  was  back  in  Paris  by  May  twenty-fourth  and  remained  a 
month.  He  easily  compared  his  condition  with  what  it  had 
been,  when  he  left.  He  no  longer  had  to  think  when  he  sat 
down  how  hard  it  would  be  to  get  up,  walking,  he  did  not  have 
to  move  slowly,  dragging  one  foot  after  the  other.  He  could 
get  up  and  down  and  walk  about  easily  and  naturally.  At 
times  too  great  exertion  reminded  him  he  was  not  altogether 
well,  but  he  was  assured  that  he  was  on  the  road  to  recovery 
and  that  time  and  care  now  would  bring  a  cure.  Dr.  Brown- 
Sequard  was  satisfied  with  the  progress  he  had  made  and  ad 
vised  him  to  try  sea-bathing.  He  went  to  Dieppe  but  finding 
no  library  in  the  place,  he  felt  he  could  not  endure  it  and  re 
maining  only  for  a  day,  he  crossed  over  to  London,  where  he 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  383 

spent  a  month  with  his  friends.  He  dined  with  Lord  Cran- 
worth  and  Sir  Henry  Holland,  was  at  Lansdowne  House, 
Stafford  House,  Holland  House,  Cambridge  House,  Argyll 
Lodge,  etc.  "  Lord  Palmerston  was  as  gay  and  jaunty  as  ever, 
Lord  Clarendon  as  fascinating,  Lord  Brougham  as  fitful,  Lord 
Lyndhurst  as  eloquent  and  clever,  Lord  Lansdowne  as  kind 
and  Lord  Cranworth  as  good ;  saw  much  of  Macaulay  at 
breakfasts  and  dinners — at  least  half  a  dozen  times,  and  twice 
in  his  own  house ;  his  conversation  was  as  full  and  interesting  as 
ever.  Nothing  seemed  too  great  or  too  small  for  his  memory." 
Heard  Bright  for  the  first  time;  was  asked  if  he  was  not  like 
an  American  speaker  and  admitted  he  would  be  glad  to  claim 
him.  He  was  granted  by  the  Speaker  a  seat  under  the  gallery 
of  the  House  for  a  month  and  he  occasionally  occupied  it. 

But  the  excitement  of  London  was  still  too  much  for  him 
and  he  went  on  July  23  to  Bains  Frescati,  near  Havre  in 
France,  where  he  remained  six  weeks,  taking  daily  swimming 
baths  and  leading  much  the  same  quiet  life  as  he  had  at  Mont- 
pellier.  He  then  made  an  excursion  through  Normandy  and 
Brittany  and  spent  three  weeks  more  in  Paris,  purchasing  en 
gravings,  manuscripts,  bronzes  and  bric-a-brac,  standing  aghast, 
as  he  wrote,  at  his  own  extravagance.  They  were  some  of  the 
same  curios  that  he  afterwards,  in  his  Washington  home,  took 
such  delight  in  showing  his  friends.  He  was  back  to  London 
by  October  tenth,  spending  a  day  with  the  poet  Tennyson  at 
his  home  on  the  Isle  of  Wight,  two  days  with  Lord  Stanhope  at 
Chevening  Park,  where  he  slept  in  the  room  occupied  for  three 
years  by  Lord  Chatham,  another  day  at  Argyll  Lodge,  where 
he  met  Gladstone  again,  and  still  another  with  the  historian 
Motley  at  Walton  on  the  Thames.  Thus  the  time  passed.  He 
purchased  of  Joseph  Parkes  in  London  an  album  containing 
autographs  of  John  Milton  and  Stafford,  which  he  ever  after 
prized  as  among  his  most  precious  possessions  and  for  which 
he  paid  forty  pounds.  It  is  now  in  the  library  of  Harvard 
College.  These  purchases,  with  the  expenses  of  his  sickness, 
consumed  all  the  savings  of  his  income  so  that  now  he  came 
home,  as  he  himself  expressed  it,  with  health  as  his  only 
capital. 

He  reached  Boston  from  Liverpool  on  November  twenty- 
first  and,  after  a  few  days  spent  there,  he  went  on  to  Wash 
ington  to  be  present  at  the  opening  of  Congress  in  December. 
He  stopped  on  the  way  at  both  New  York  and  Philadelphia. 
To  all  whom  he  met  and  who  inquired  about  his  health  he  an 
swered  that  he  was  well  again.  And  so  he  was,  able  again  to 
be  at  his  post  and  discharge  his  full  duty  as  Senator. 


CHAPTER  XXV 


OF  1860 LECTURE  ON  LAFAYETTE 

IN  Boston  as  in  New  York  Sumner  missed  some  of  his  early 
friends.  Death  had  been  doing  its  work  among  them.  Rufus 
Choate,  brilliant  and  able,  ever  to  be  remembered  as  one  of  the 
greatest  of  lawyers  and  one  of  the  most  eloquent  of  men,  had 
closed  a  hard  life,  unsparingly  spent  in  the  service  of  his  profes 
sion.  He  had  been  one  of  Sumner's  early  and  constant  friends, 
their  law  offices  being  in  the  same  building,  Number  Four,  Court 
Street.  Though  they  had  differed  widely  in  politics,  Choate 
maintaining,  with  his  rich  rhetoric,  the  fortune  and  the  fame 
of  Webster,  even  beside  the  grave  of  his  chief  in  one  of  the  most 
beautiful  eulogies  ever  pronounced,  still  he  was  too  great  not 
to  be  tolerant  of  Sumner's  difference  of  opinion.  And  when 
he  was  gone,  Sumner  wrote :  "  I  have  a  tender  feeling  for 
Choate.  For  years  he  was  my  neighbor  in  Court  Street,  and  I 
have  never  had  from  him  anything  but  kindness."  Wm.  H. 
Prescott  too  was  dead.  Gentle,  scholarly  and  sympathetic, 
caring  too  little  for  party  to  allow  it  to  influence  his  judgment 
of  issues  against  the  right,  as  a  historian  would  see  it,  he  had 
ever  been  one  to  whom  Sumner  turned  with  confidence  for 
sympathy.  As  Sumner  had  sought  the  darkened  room  that 
sheltered  Prescott's  eyes,  and  chatted  pleasantly  in  the  days 
when  he  was  threatened  with  blindness,  so,  after  the  assault, 
Prescott  had  sought  the  bedside  of  Sumner  to  show,  by  tender 
sympathy,  how  his  heart  was  moved.  Theodore  Parker  too 
was  gone.  In  the  grasp  of  a  deadly  disease,  the  fearless 
preacher  of  the  liberty  of  man  as  well  as  the  religion  of  God, 
had  gone  to  Europe,  in  the  vain  hope  of  recovery;  but  it  after 
wards  proved  that  it  was  only  to  find  his  grave,  on  the  banks 
of  the  Arno,  near  the  sepulchres  of  Michel  Angelo  and  Galileo, 
in  the  Protestant  cemetery  of  Florence. 

Dr.  Howe  was  in  Canada,  whither  he  had  gone  to  be  beyond 
the  reach  of  the  process  of  the  United  States,  in  case  he  should 
be  sought  for  complicity  in  the  insurrection  of  John  Brown 
at  Harper's  Ferry.  Howe  and  Parker  had  known  Brown  and 
had  entered  into  some  of  his  anti-slavery  projects,  though 

384 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  335 

neither  had  been  parties  to  that  at  Harper's  Ferry.  Sumner 
regretted  Howe's  absence  and  urged  him  to  return  and  brave  the 
threatened  storm.  This  Howe  afterwards  did.  He  testified 
before  a  Committee  of  investigation  of  the  Senate  and  his 
want  of  knowledge  of  the  Harper's  Ferry  affair  became  appar 
ent. 

The  first  public  part  Sumner  took  in  the  proceedings  of 
the  Senate  arose  from  this  same  question.  On  the  day  of 
the  opening  of  the  session,  December  fifth,  1859,  Mason  of 
Virginia  moved  the  appointment  of  a  committee  to  inquire  into 
the  facts  of  the  seizure  of  the  armory  and  arsenal  of  the  United 
States  at  Harper's  Ferry  and  the  resolution  concluded  by  pro 
viding  that  the  committee  should  have  power  to  send  for  per 
sons  and  papers.  The  committee  was  appointed  and  Mason 
was  made  chairman.  They  summoned  John  Brown,  Jr.,  of 
Kansas  and  F.  B.  Sanborn  and  James  Redpath  of  Massachu 
setts.  These  all  failed  to  appear.  Thaddeus  Hyatt  of  New 
York  was  also  summoned.  He  appeared  but  refused  to  testify. 
Thereupon  a  resolution  was  offered  in  the  Senate,  by  Mason  on 
behalf  of  his  committee,  to  commit  Hyatt  to  the  common  jail  of 
the  District  of  Columbia  till  he  should  signify  his  willingness 
to  answer.  Sumner  resisted  the  resolution  to  commit  Hyatt. 
He  insisted  that,  in  such  case,  the  Senate  had  no  power  to  com 
mit,  that  it  could  only  do  so,  when  sitting  as  a  court,  in  cases 
of  impeachment,  in  determining  the  election  or  qualification  of 
its  members  and  in  punishing  them  for  disorderly  behavior, 
in  all  of  which  cases  the  Senate  acted  judicially,  under  express 
authority  of  the  Constitution.  Two  other  cases  grew  out  of 
these,  the  power  to  punish  for  abuse  of  the  privileges  of  the 
Senate,  as  in  obtaining  surreptitiously  a  copy  of  a  treaty,  or 
for  misconduct  on  the  part  of  its  officers.  Beyond  these,  he 
insisted  the  Senate  had  no  such  power.  And  especially  did  it 
not  have  the  power  of  a  grand  jury  and  a  court  to  investigate 
and  punish  crimes.  But  the  resolution  of  commitment  passed 
and  Hyatt  was  sent  to  the  common  jail  of  the  District,  where 
he  remained  for  more  than  three  months  and  until  the  com 
mittee  in  making  the  final  report  of  their  investigations  recom 
mended  his  discharge.  Sumner  visited  him  frequently  while 
in  jail  and  did  what  he  could  to  relieve  the  severity  of  his 
punishment. 

The  case  of  Mr.  Sanborn  illustrates  still  farther  the  length 
the  slave  power  was  willing  to  go.  He  was  a  teacher  in  Con 
cord,  Massachusetts,  and  having  refused  obedience  to  the 
summons  of  the  Committee,  it  issued,  to  the  Sergeant  at  Arms 
of  the  Senate,  a  warrant  for  his  arrest.  The  writ  was  sent  by 


386  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  Sergeant  at  Arms  to  the  Marshal  of  the  District  for  service. 
A  deputy  marshal  under  cover  of  night,  seized  Sanborn  in 
execution  of  the  process  and  was  about  to  carry  him  away,  when 
his  sister,  by  procuring  the  bells  of  the  village  to  be  rung, 
aroused  the  neighbors  and  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  having  been 
issued,  the  execution  of  the  process  was  prevented  and  the  next 
day  he  was  brought  before  the  Supreme  Court  and  discharged, 
the  Court  holding  that,  if  the  Sergeant  at  Arms  had  power  to 
make  the  arrest,  he,  at  least,  had  no  power  to  delegate  this 
authority  to  a  U.  S.  Marshal.  Upon  his  release  Mr.  Sanborn 
memorialized  the  Senate  upon  the  outrage  that  had  been  done 
him.  Sumner  presented  the  memorial,  with  some  remarks  re 
citing  the  facts  and  moving  its  reference  to  the  Judiciary  Com 
mittee.  This  motion  carried.  Mr.  Bayard,  of  Delaware,  for  the 
Committee  reported  a  bill  authorizing  the  Sergeant  at  Arms  to 
appoint  deputies.  This  was  intended  to  obviate  the  decision 
of  Chief  Justice  Shaw.  But  the  bill  was  lost  and  there  the 
incident  ended. 

Slavery  was  the  all-absorbing  subject  in  Congress.  Events 
were  fast  hurrying  towards  a  crisis.  The  obsequious  adminis 
tration  of  Franklin  Pierce  had  been  followed  by  the  still  more 
obsequious  rule  of  James  Buchanan.  The  blustering  threats  of 
secession  were  crystallizing  into  a  dogged  determination  to  se 
cede.  The  North  was  steeling  itself  to  meet  the  issue  of  war 
if  made.  Each  side  stood  watching  the  other,  waiting  to  see 
what  the  next  move  was  to  be.  Sumner  re-entered  the  contest 
slowly;  not  because  undecided  upon  the  course  to  pursue,  but 
to  measure  his  newly  recovered  strength.  He  was  given  a  place 
on  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  a  place  for  which  he 
was  peculiarly  fitted  and  which  he  was  to  continue  to  fill  with 
rare  ability  for  twelve  years,  ten  of  which  he  was  to  be  its 
Chairman,  and  until  removed  as  a  punishment  for  his  resis 
tance  of  President  Grant.  He  introduced  a  resolution  pro 
posing  the  abolition  of  the  numerous  custom-house  oaths  ad 
ministered  under  acts  of  Congress  and  suggested  a  simple 
declaration  as  a  substitute  therefor,  a  reform  that  has  since 
been  made,  much  to  the  comfort  of  home-coming  travellers 
from  foreign  lands.  He  also  introduced  a  resolution  to  in 
crease  the  safety  of  passengers  in  steamships  for  California, 
often  dangerously  overloaded  and  without  proper  accommoda 
tions.  Both  these  resolutions  the  Senate  gave  unanimous  con 
sent  to  consider.  But  when  he  introduced  a  number  of  peti 
tions  on  the  subject  of  slavery  and  moved  their  reference  to 
the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  on  motion  of  Mason  of  Vir 
ginia,  they  were  promptly  laid  upon  the  table,  all  the  Democrats 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  387 

twenty-five  in  number  voting  in  favor  of  it,  while  the  Repub 
licans,  nineteen,  voted  against  it. 

A  bill  was  again  pending  for  the  admission  of  Kansas. 
During  the  four  years  of  Sunmer's  disability,  changes  had  been 
taking  place  in  the  Territory.  The  constant  influx  of  people 
from  the  Free  States  had  placed  the  Free-Soil  party  largely 
in  the  majority.  Instead  of  practising  non-intervention  and 
refusing  to  vote,  as  they  had  done  under  the  disgraceful  sway 
of  Atchison  and  his  border  ruffians,  the  Eepublicans  had  boldly 
entered  the  field  and  captured  the  Legislature.  Instead  of 
being  bribed  by  the  terms  of  the  English  Bill  into  seeking  ad 
mission  as  a  State  with  a  pro-slavery  constitution,  they  came  to 
Congress  firmly  insisting  upon  admission  as  a  Free  State.  The 
last  speech  Sumner  made  in  the  Senate  was  entitled,  The  Crime 
against  Kansas,  delivered  on  May  nineteenth-twentieth,  1856, 
on  a  bill  for  the  admission  of  Kansas.  Two  days  later  for 
words  uttered  in  that  speech,  he  was  struck  down  in  the  Senate 
Chamber.  Now  after  four  years  of  suffering,  his  first  speech 
in  the  Senate  on  his  return,  was  upon  a  bill,  on  the  same  sub 
ject,  the  admission  of  Kansas.  On  the  fourth  day  of  June, 
1860,  he  again  urged  its  admission  as  a  Free  State.  Brooks, 
his  assailant,  it  will  be  remembered,  was  dead  and  Butler 
for  whose  sake,  the  assault  was  alleged  to  have  been  made,  had 
followed  him.  The  circumstances  of  Sumner's  return  to  the 
Senate  were  impressive.  He  opened  his  speech,  entitled  The 
Barbarism  of  Slavery,  with  these  words : 

"  Mr.  President. — Undertaking  now,  after  a  silence  of  more 
than  four  years,  to  address  the  Senate  on  this  important  sub 
ject,  I  should  suppress  the  emotions  natural  to  such  an  occa 
sion,  if  I  did  not  declare  on  the  threshold  my  gratitude  to  that 
Supreme  Being  through  whose  benign  care  I  am  enabled,  after 
much  suffering  and  many  changes,  once  again  to  resume  my 
duties  here,  and  to  speak  for  the  cause  so  near  my  heart.  To 
the  honored  Commonwealth  whose  representative  I  am,  and 
also  to  my  immediate  associates  in  this  body,  with  whom  I 
enjoy  the  fellowship  which  is  found  in  thinking  alike  concern 
ing  the  Republic,  I  owe  thanks  which  I  seize  the  moment  to 
express,  for  indulgence  extended  to  me  throughout  the  pro 
tracted  seclusion  enjoined  by  medical  skill ;  and  I  trust  that  it 
will  not  be  thought  unbecoming  in  me  to  put  on  record  here, 
as  an  apology  for  leaving  my  seat  so  long  vacant,  without 
making  way,  by  resignation,  for  a  successor,  that  I  acted  under 
the  illusion  of  an  invalid,  whose  hopes  for  restoration  to  natural 
health  continued  against  oft-recurring  disappointment." 

"  When  I  last  entered  into  this  debate,  it  became  my  duty  to 


388  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

expose  the  Crime  against  Kansas  and  to  insist  upon  the  imme 
diate  admission  of  that  Territory  as  a  State  of  this  Union,  with 
a  Constitution  forbidding  slavery.  Time  has  passed,  but  the 
question  remains.  Resuming 'the  discussion  precisely  where  I 
left  it,  I  am  happy  to  avow  that  rule  of  moderation  which,  it  is 
said,  may  venture  to  fix  the  boundaries  of  wisdom  itself.  I 
have  no  personal  griefs  to  utter:  only  a  vulgar  egotism  could 
intrude  such  into  this  Chamber.  I  have  no  personal  wrongs  to 
avenge;  only  a  brutish  nature  could  attempt  to  wield  that 
vengeance  which  belongs  to  the  Lord.  The  years  that  have 
intervened  and  the  tombs  that  have  opened  since  I  spoke  have 
their  voices,  too,  which  I  cannot  fail  to  hear.  Besides  what  am 
I,  what  is  any  man  among  the  living  or  the  dead,  compared 
with  the  question  before  us?  It  is  this  alone  which  I  shall 
discuss,  and  I  begin  the  argument  with  that  easy  victory  which 
is  found  in  charity." 

Simmer's  purpose  in  this  speech,  while  incidentally  advocat 
ing  the  admission  of  Kansas  as  a  free  State,  was  to  lay  bare  the 
essential  character  of  slavery  itself.  Southern  members  of 
Congress,  with  much  unction,  had  for  years  descanted  on  its 
humanizing  influence,  calling  it  ennobling,  dispensing  with 
titles  of  nobility  as  in  the  old  world  and  recognizing  a  natural 
superiority  of  one  race  of  men  over  another,  as  one  of  "two 
civilizations  "  that  of  the  North  and  the  other  of  the  South, 
improving  the  character  of  both  the  slave  and  the  master. 
Jefferson  Davis  had  called  it  "  but  a  form  of  civil  government 
for  those  who  by  their  nature  were  not  fit  to  govern  them 
selves."  While  Hunter  of  Virginia  had  declared  in  the  Senate 
that  it  was  the  very  keystone  of  the  arch  that  sustained  our 
social  fabric.  Brown  of  Mississippi  declared  it  was  "  a  great 
moral,  social  and  political  blessing."  Hammond  of  South 
Carolina  insisted  that  its  "  frame  of  society  is  the  best  in  the 
world."  Sumner  thought  it  too  much  the  fashion  to  let  such 
statements  as  these,  made  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate,  go 
unchallenged. 

He  had  for  some  time  had  it  in  mind  to  openly  and  em 
phatically  attack  them  in  a  speech  in  the  Senate.  He  felt  their 
absurdity  and  was  convinced  of  their  pernicious  influence. 
Beyond  this  he  felt  that  in  the  crisis  that  was  approaching, 
public  attention  generally  should  be  called  to  the  inherent 
degrading  tendency  of  the  institution  of  slavery  to  both  the 
master  and  the  slave  and  to  the  country  as  well.  He  had 
already  discussed  Slavery,  in  arguing  that  it  was  sectional  in 
character  while  Freedom  was  national,  and  again  in  urging  the 
unconstitutionally  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  and  still  again. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  389 

in  insisting  upon  the  sacred  obligation  of  the  Missouri  Com 
promise  and  the  crimes  that  had  been  attempted  against  Kan 
sas.  Though  upon  all  these  occasions  he  had  spoken  at  length, 
he  felt  that  he  had  said  too  little  of  the  essential  character  of 
slavery  itself,  partly  from  a  disinclination  to  press  a  matter 
about  which  Southern  people  were  so  sensitive.  But  he  thought 
that  the  time  for  any  such  consideration  was  past  and  that  this 
aspect  of  the  subject  should  now  be  set  forth  clearly.  During 
his  whole  term  of  service  in  the  Senate  he  had  seen  how  often 
the  cause  he  had  so  much  at  heart,  had  been  baffled  and  de 
feated  by  a  pro-slavery  President.  The  time  for  another 
Presidential  election  was  at  hand  and  with  a  divided  and 
disorganized  opposition  he  felt,  for  once,  there  was  a  prospect 
for  the  election  of  one  who  was  against  slavery.  But  whatever 
the  result  of  that  might  be  he  was  convinced  that  the  effect  of 
the  delivery  and  circulation  of  such  a  speech  could  not  be  other 
wise  than  good. 

Others  differed  from  Sumner  upon  this  subject.  The  times 
were  ominous.  Many  good  men  wished  by  farther  concessions 
to  slavery  to  avert  the  calamities  that  seemed  to  threaten  the 
country.  Such  a  speech  could  have  no  other  effect  upon  South 
ern  slave  masters  and  their  representatives  in  Congress  than 
to  inflame  already  angry  passions  and  render  compromise 
more  difficult.  Even  some  Republicans,  hoping  to  carry  the 
National  election,  feared  its  effect.  They  thought  it  might 
influence  against  them  conservative  voters  who  were  interested 
in  the  new  movement,  by  giving  a  too  anti-slavery  caste  to  its 
purpose.  But  Sumner  differed  from  them  again.  He  had 
concluded  that  too  much  had  been  yielded  already  and  that  the 
temper  of  the  North  demanded  resistance  to  these  extravagant 
pretensions  of  the  South  and  a  more  manly  and  independent 
stand  on  the  part  of  the  representatives  of  the  North  in  Con 
gress.  However,  all  agreed  that  if  the  unvarnished  truth  was 
to  be  told  to  the  South  in  words,  which  in  their  plainness,  had 
some  of  the  appearance  of  severity,  no  one  by  suffering  had 
gained  a  better  right  to  tell  it  than  Sumner.  A  brief  summary 
of  the  speech  will  show  the  plainness  of  his  language. 

He  argued  that  slavery  which  created  property,  in  man  was 
an  impiety,  because  according  to  the  law  of  nature,  written  by 
the  same  hand  that  placed  the  planets  in  their  orbits  every 
human  being  had  title  to  himself  direct  from  the  Almighty. 
A  man  might  be  poor  in  this  world's  goods  but  he  owned  him 
self.  Slave-masters  might  say  they  owned  the  sun  and  moon 
and  stars  but  not  that  they  owned  man  endowed  with  a  soul 
destined  to  live  immortal  when  sun,  moon  and  stars  have  passed 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

away.  Slavery  was  a  complete  abrogation  of  the  marriage  tie. 
No  such  sacrament  was  respected  under  it.  All  such  ties  were 
subject  to  the  selfish  interest  or  still  more  selfish  lust  of  the 
master  whose  license  knew  no  check.  The  chastity  of  a  whole 
race  was  exposed  to  violence  while  the  result  was  recorded  in  the 
tell-tale  faces  of  children  glowing  with  a  master's  blood,  but 
doomed,  for  their  mother's  skin,  to  slavery  through  descending 
generations.  By  polygamy  one  man  had  many  wives  bound  to 
him  by  the  marriage  tie  and  protected  by  law,  but  slavery 
delivered  a  whole  race  over  to  prostitution  and  concubinage, 
unprotected  by  any  law.  For  the  children,  it  was  a  complete 
abrogation  of  the  parental  relation.  At  the  command  of  a 
master,  little  ones,  though  clasped  by  a  mother's  arms,  were 
swept  under  the  hammer  of  the  auctioneer.  Slavery  closed  the 
door  of  knowledge  to  them,  for  the  law  in  many  places  posi 
tively  forbid  that  a  slave  be  taught  to  read  even  the  book  of  life, 
where  they  might  learn  that  a  Savior  died,  that  all  men,  with 
out  distinction  of  race,  might  be  saved.  While  it  fastened 
manacles  upon  the  slave  it  thus  also  fastened  manacles  upon  his 
soul.  Slavery  appropriated  all  the  toil  of  its  victims,  losing 
every  pretension  of  right.  It  was  robbery  and  larceny  both 
under  the  garb  of  law,  sordidly  taking  away  from  the  slave 
the  fruits  of  the  bitter  sweat  of  his  brow  and  at  the  same  time 
the  mainspring  to  exertion.  From  its  home  in  Africa,  such 
barbarism  had  been  transplanted  to  American  soil  and  thus 
were  the  prerogatives  of  barbarous,  half-naked  African  chiefs 
perpetuated  in  American  slave-masters. 

The  fruits  of  such  a  system  were  too  clearly  to  be  seen  in  the 
comparative  view  of  the  development  of  the  Free  and  Slave 
States.  Slavery  so  degraded  free  labor  as  to  stamp  the  brand 
of  degradation  upon  the  daily  toil  decreed  by  the  Almighty 
and  which  contributes  so  much  to  a  true  civilization.  No  slave- 
master,  of  course,  worked,  and  his  pernicious  example  pervaded 
all  classes,  and  the  land  itself  became  a  prey  to  that  paralysis 
caused  by  a  violation  of  the  law  of  God.  Slave  territory  ex 
ceeding  by  more  than  200,000  square  miles  that  of  the  Free 
States,  in  happiness  of  climate  adapted  to  productions  of 
special  value,  with  more  than  fifty  navigable  rivers,  never  closed 
by  the  rigors  of  winter,  with  a  long  stretch  of  coast,  indented 
by  harbors,  contrasting  strangely  with  the  North,  with  its 
climate  often  churlish,  with  few  harbors  and  still  fewer  nav 
igable  rivers,  both  often  swept  by  storms  and  closed  by  ice,  yet 
the  North  had  far  outstripped  the  South  in  growth  of  popula 
tion  as  well  as  in  material  and  moral  development. 

But  turning  from  this  discussion  of  the  effect  of  slavery  upon 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  391 

the  slave,  and  what  must  be  said  of  its  influence  upon  their 
masters  ?  The  denial  of  all  rights  in  the  slaves,  of  course  could 
be  sustained  only  by  a  disregard  of  other  rights  common  to 
the  whole  community,  rights  of  the  person,  of  the  press  and  of 
speech.  Barbarous  standards  were  unblushingly  avowed.  The 
swagger  of  the  bully  was  called  chivalry;  swiftness  to  quarrel, 
courage ;  the  bludgeon  was  substituted  for  argument,  and  assas 
sination  became  one  of  the  fine  arts.  It  produced  the  most  per 
nicious  effect  upon  manners  and  transformed  citizens  into  des 
pots.  There  was  no  surer  way  of  judging  a  people  than  by  its 
laws;  yet  the  slave-code  protected  such  atrocities  as  to  show 
that  the  laws  of  humanity  had  been  totally  perverted,  stealing 
the  fruit  of  another's  labor,  polluting  the  body,  outraging  the 
familv,  making  marriage  impossible,  decreeing  ignorance. 

Sumner  quoted  illustrations  to  show  the  brutalizing  relation 
of  the  master  to  the  slave :  a  description  in  an  advertisement  of 
a  runaway  slave,  (( has  holes  in  his  ears,  a  scar  on  the  right  side 
of  the  forehead,  has  been  shot  in  the  hind  part  of  his  legs,  is 
marked  on  the  back  with  the  whip." 

"  For  Sale : — An  accomplished  and  handsome  lady's  maid. 
She  is  just  sixteen  years  of  age ;  was  raised  in  a  genteel  family 
in  Maryland ;  and  is  now  proposed  to  be  sold,  not  for  any  fault, 
but  simply  because  the  owner  has  no  further  use  for  her.  A 
note  directed  to  C.  D.  Gadsly's  Hotel,  will  receive  prompt 
attention." 

A  slave-master's  cure  for  a  runaway  slave :  "  If  a  nigger  ran 
away  when  he  caught  him,  he  would  bind  his  knee  over  a  log, 
and  fasten  him  so  he  could  not  stir;  then  he'd  take  a  pair  of 
pincers,  and  pull  out  one  of  his  toe  nails  by  the  roots,  and  tell 
him  if  he  ever  ran  away  again,  he  would  pull  out  two  of  them, 
and  if  he  ran  away  again  after  that,  he  told  him  he'd  pull  out 
four  of  them,  and  so  on,  doubling  each  time.  He  never  had  to 
do  it  more  than  twice ;  it  always  cured  them." 

Another  instance  was  given,  where  a  master  enraged  at  his 
slave  for  an  attempt  to  run  away,  had  deliberately  cut  the 
tendon  of  his  heel,  illustrating  the  language  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  North  Carolina,  that  "  The  power  of  the  master  must 
be  absolute  to  render  the  submission  of  the  slave  perfect." 

If  the  picture  could  receive  a  darker  coloring  than  such 
illustrations  gave  it,  Sumner  declared  it  could  only  be,  by  paint 
ing  the  character  of  the  slave-overseer,  the  slave-breeder  and 
the  slave-hunter  in  whom  the  essential  brutality,  vulgarity  and 
crime  of  slavery  were  all  embodied. 

The  effect  of  such  influences,  he  said,  upon  the  relations  of 
slave-masters  to  each  other  and  to  society  and  government  were 


392  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

unmistakable.  Nobody  could  be  surrounded  by  vice  and 
violence  without  coming  under  its  influence.  Instead  of  en 
nobling  the  master,  slavery  dragged  him  down.  Violence, 
brutality  and  injustice  must  be  reproduced  in  those  who  lived 
within  their  influence.  Living  with  slaves,  seeing  their  deg 
radation  and  ignorance  closed  the  eyes  of  the  master  and 
withdrew  the  spirit  of  emulation  produced  by  the  society 
of  equals  or  association  with  superiors.  The  master  saw 
nothing  to  excite  his  emulation  or  remind  him  of  his  deficien 
cies.  Accustomed  from  youth  to  age  to  brutality  and  violence 
he  naturally  adopted  the  bludgeon,  the  pistol  and  the  knife  in 
his  relation  to  society,  and  to  his  home ;  and  the  street  fight  and 
the  brawl  marked  his  appearance  everywhere.  "  Men  slaughter 
each  other  with  almost  perfect  impunity/'  read  the  Governor's 
message  to  the  Legislature  of  Kentucky,  in  1837,  and  he  urged 
them  to  redeem  their  State  from  a  condition  which  would 
justify  the  name  of  "  the  Land  of  Blood."  "  Why  do  we  hear 
of  stabbings  and  shootings  almost  daily  in  some  part  or  other 
of  our  State  ?  "  asked  the  Governor  of  Alabama. 

Slavery,  he  argued,  was  against  all  freedom  of  speech  or  of 
the  press,  for  no  one  in  the  slave  States  could  speak  or  write 
plainly  about  it,  except  at  his  peril.  A  book  agent  offered  for 
sale  Dr.  Channing's  sermon  on  West  India  Emancipation 
and  was  prosecuted  for  it.  A  large  number  of  copies  of  Spur- 
geon's  sermons  were  publicly  burned  at  Montgomery,  Alabama ; 
and  the  use  of  Wayland's  Moral  Science  was  forbidden  in  one 
of  the  colleges  of  that  State  because  they  contained  "  abolition 
doctrines/'  Speeches  delivered  in  the  United  States  Senate 
were  stopped  in  the  post-office  and  booksellers  receiving  them 
were  mobbed,  while  once  at  least  the  speeches  were  seriously 
proceeded  against  by  a  Grand  Jury.  Abolitionists  were 
watched  and  mobbed  for  their  opinions.  Rewards  were  offered 
in  the  public  newspapers  for  the  heads  of  Members  of  Congress  ; 
Five  thousand  dollars  for  that  of  William  H.  Seward,  ten 
thousand  dollars  for  the  delivery  of  Joshua  R.  Giddings  at 
Richmond;  and  the  Governor  of  Georgia  was  recommended 
by  a  meeting  of  slave-masters  to  offer  five  thousand  dollars  .for 
either  of  ten  persons,  citizens  of  New  York,  Massachusetts  and 
one  of  Great  Britain,  none  of  whom  had  ever  been  in  Georgia. 
Even  in  the  Free  States,  anti-slavery  meetings  were  broken  up, 
newspapers  mobbed  and  in  one  case  the  editor  was  killed. 
Samuel  Hoar  of  Massachusetts  appointed  a  Commissioner  from 
his  State  to  Charleston  to  prevent  the  detention  and  sale,  as 
slaves,  of  free  colored  mariners  from  his  own  State,  who  might 
touch  at  that  port,  was  excluded  from  his  hotel  by  the  pro- 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  393 

prietor  for  fear  of  a  mob,  and  forcibly  driven  from   South 
Carolina. 

The  exhibitions  of  the  barbarism  of  slavery  in  Congressional 
history,  he  said,  were  not  less  marked.  During  the  debate  on 
the  compromise  measures  of  1850,  Foote  of  Mississippi  drew 
upon  Benton  of  Missouri  a  five-chambered  revolver  and  cocked 
it;  Arnold  of  Tennessee  was  called  by  Dawson  of  Louisiana 
"  a  d — d  coward/'  "  a  d — d  blackguard/'  and  he  threatened  if 
Arnold  did  not  behave  better  he  would  "  cut  his  throat  from 
ear  to  ear."  Challenges  to  duel  were  common  on  the  floor  of 
the  Senate  from  slave-masters,  and  Jefferson  Davis  there  vin 
dicated  the  duel  as  a  mode  of  settling  personal  differences. 
"  Insult,  bullying  and  threats  characterize  the  slaveholders  in 
Congress,"  said  John  Quincy  Adams.  And  at  a  public  dinner 
at  Waterborough,  South  Carolina,  this  toast  was  drunk,  "  May 
we  never  want  a  Democrat  to  trip  up  the  heels  of  a  Federalist 
or  a  hangman  to  prepare  a  halter  for  John  Quincy  Adams." 
Joshua  R.  Giddings  presented  to  the  House  resolutions  affirm 
ing  that  slavery  was  a  local  institution  and  could  not  exist 
outside  of  the  slave  States.  For  this  the  House  censured  him ; 
Giddings  resigned  and  his  constituents  at  once  re-elected  him. 
Dawson  of  Louisiana  once  drew  a  bowie  knife  to  assassinate 
him.  Again  when  one  day  speaking  of  a  certain  transaction  in 
which  negroes  were  concerned  in  Georgia,  Black  of  that  State, 
raised  a  bludgeon  and  standing  in  front  of  Giddings'  desk 
declared  that  if  he  repeated  that  language  again,  he  would 
knock  him  down.  "  It  was  a  solemn  moment  for'  me,  I  had 
never  been  knocked  down,  and  having  some  curiosity  upon  that 
subject,  I  repeated  the  language,"  said  the  six-foot  Representa 
tive,  when  afterwards  describing  the  scene.  But  Black  did  not 
attempt  to  knock  him  down.  Dawson  of  Louisiana,  however, 
put  his  hand  in  his  pocket  and  with  an  oath  threatened  he 
would  shoot  Giddings,  at  the  same  time  cocking  the  pistol  so 
that  all  around  could  hear  it  click.  But  he  did  not  shoot. 
Foote  dared  Hale  in  the  Senate  to  come  to  Mississippi  and  he 
should  be  hung  and  that  if  necessary  he  would  himself  assist  in 
the  operation.  Hammond,  of  South  Carolina,  in  the  House, 
warned  the  Abolitionists  to  stay  away  from  South  Carolina, 
unless  they  expected  "  a  felon's  death."  Payne,  of  Alabama, 
declared  that  if  they  came  to  the  South  they  would  hang  them 
like  dogs.  Martin,  of  Virginia,  told  Lovejoy  of  Illinois,  that 
if  he  came  among  them  they  would  do  with  him  as  they  had 
with  John  Brown — hang  him  up  as  high  as  Haman,  and  in  the 
same  debate  he  was  called  by  other  Southern  members  a 


394  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

"  black-hearted  scoundrel  and  nigger  stealing  thief,"  "  crazy/' 
"  a  perjured  villain/'  and  "  a  mean,  despicable  wretch/' 

Sumner  scouted  the  idea  that  slavery  was  justified  by  the 
alleged  inferiority  of  the  black  race.  For  if  that  be  true,  he 
argued,  what  would  hinder  the  same  principle  being  applied 
to  other  races  ?  Why  might  not  the  Japanese  also  be  declared 
inferior  and  all  enslaved  ?  Why  might  not  some  of  the  weaker 
and  less  highly  civilized  white  races  be  declared  inferior  to 
others  and  enslaved? 

The  doctrine  of  Popular  Sovereignty,  or  permitting  the 
people  of  a  territory  to  determine  whether  it  should  be  formed 
into  a  Slave  or  Free  State  could  find  no  support  anywhere. 
There  are  rights  which  can  neither  be  voted  up  nor  voted  down, 
for  they  are  above  all  votes.  Neither  the  people,  nor  Congress, 
nor  any  Territorial  Legislature  could  give  Slavery  a  legal 
existence  in  any  Territory  of  the  United  States.  He  therefore, 
urged  them  to  so  declare  by  legislative  act  admitting  Kansas  as 
a  Free  State. 

Sumner  closed  with  these  prophetic  words,  which  were  six 
months  later  to  be  realized  in  the  election  of  Lincoln :  "  Thus, 
Sir,  speaking  for  Freedom  in  Kansas,  I  have  spoken  for  Free 
dom  everywhere.  You  may  reject  it,  but  it  will  be  only  for  to 
day.  The  sacred  animosity  of  Freedom  and  Slavery  can  end 
only  with  the  triumph  of  Freedom.  The  same  question  will 
be  carried  soon  before  that  high  tribunal,  supreme  over  Senate 
and  Court,  where  the  judges  are  counted  by  millions,  and  the 
judgment  rendered  will  be  the  solemn  charge  of  an  awakened 
people,  instructing  a  new  President,  in  the  name  of  Freedom, 
to  see  that  Civilization  receives  no  detriment." 

When  Sumner  ceased  speaking,  Senator  Chestnut,  of  South 
Carolina  arose  and  counselled  that  no  notice  whatever  should 
be  taken  of  the  speech,  saying  that  Sumner  "  after  ranging 
over  Europe,  crawling  through  the  back  doors,  to  whine  at  the 
feet  of  British  aristocracy,  craving  pity  and  reaping  a  rich 
harvest  of  contempt,  the  slanderer  of  States  and  men,  had  now 
reappeared  in  the  Senate,"  that  they  were  "  not  inclined  again 
to  send  forth  the  recipient  of  punishment,  howling  through  the 
world,  yelping  fresh  cries  of  slander  and  malice."  Sumner 
merely  replied  that  he  would  print  the  words  of  Chestnut,  with 
the  speech,  as  an  additional  illustration  of  the  "  Barbarism  of 
Slavery."  "  I  hope  he  will  do  it,"  rejoined  Hammond,  Chest 
nut's  colleague  from  South  Carolina,  who  had  been  sitting, 
during  part  of  the  speech,  with  Keitt,  the  accomplice  of  Pres 
ton  S.  Brooks,  at  his  side. 

The  attitude  of  Senators  towards  the  speech  was  various. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  395 

The  feeling  of  Southerners  was  one  of  hostility.  They 
gathered  in  groups  about  the  doors,  came  in  and  out,  or  sat  for 
a  moment  with  the  studied  appearance  of  inattention.  Some 
of  them  were  purposely  noisy ;  and  once  Sumner  stopped,  while 
the  Chair  rapped  them  to  order.  Breckenridge  sat  and  pre 
tended  to  read  a  book,  but  his  eyes  wandered  from  the  page, 
and  he  finally  put  it  away  and  sat  gazing  at  the  speaker,  with  a 
frown,  till  he  closed.  Jefferson  Davis,  too,  pretended  to  read, 
but  it  was  remarked,  that  the  copy  of  "  The  Globe  "  which  he 
held  in  his  hand  was  upside  down.  Wigfall,  with  lowering  and 
sinister  countenance,  passed  whispering  from  one  Senator  to 
another,  apparently  hatching  mischief,  but  was  met  only  by 
shakes  of  the  head,  from-  the  older  members.  Mason  came  in 
and  sat  down  and  commenced  to  write  a  letter,  never  noticing 
the  speaker.  But  Lamar,  of  Mississippi,  scholar  and  orator 
himself,  had  come  in  from  the  House  and  occupied  one  of  the 
vacant  chairs  of  the  Senators  and  seemed  to  enjoy,  with  a 
relish,  the  intellectual  treat,  though  upon  a  subject,  on  which 
he  entertained  radically  different  opinions.  The  Republicans 
were  not  all  in  sympathy.  Some,  like  Crittenden,  still  hoped 
the  approaching  crisis  might  be  averted  by  compromise;  and 
they  deprecated  a  speech  that  seemed  to  destroy  every  hope  of 
such  a  cure.  But  Wilson,  his  colleague,  with  King,  of  New 
York,  and  Burlingame  and  Lovejoy  of  the  House  sat  near  him 
throughout,  apparently  anticipating  violence  and,  if  not  alto 
gether  approving  the  propriety  of  the  speech,  at  least  recogniz 
ing  his  right  to  judge  of  that  and  feeling  themselves  assured 
that  he  was  only  telling  the  truth  and  telling  it  well. 

The  speech  was  read  throughout  in  a  moderate  tone  and 
Sumner,  after  its  delivery,  was  able  to  walk  to  his  lodgings,  a 
mile  from  the  Capitol,  without  any  bad  effects  apparent.  His. 
health  had  borne  the  test  he  had  so  long  hoped  for;  he  was  back 
in  his  place  in  the  Senate,  again  able  to  do  his  work.  For  fear 
of  violence,  Wilson  and  Burlingame,  with  another  friend,  ac 
companied  him  home.  There  was  some  talk  of  violence,  but 
the  disposition  of  Southerners  generally  was  to  treat  the  speech 
with  the  contempt  of  silence,  perhaps  feeling  the  weight  of 
Brooks'  conduct  upon  themselves.  The  only  apparent  threat  of 
violence  came  four  days  later,  when  Sumner  was  sitting  alone 
in  his  rooms,  in  the  evening,  and  a  man  called  and  finding 
him  alone  said  he  was  one  of  the  abused  and  slandered  class, 
against  whom  the  speech  had  been  made,  and  that  he  was  one  of 
four  who  had  come  to  Washington  to  demand  reparation. 
He  became  so  violent  in  his  manner  that  Sumner  finally  or 
dered  him  out  of  the  house  and  he  went  away  threatening  to 


396  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

return  again,  with  his  companions.  Sumner  informed  Wilson 
of  what  had  happened  and  Wilson  insisted  that  some  precau 
tions  should  be  taken.  Later  in  the  evening  another  stranger 
came  to  the  door  and  asked  to  see  Sumner  alone,  but,  being  told 
that  he  was  not  alone,  he  went  away.  Still  later  three  men 
came  together  and  asked  to  see  Sumner  alone  and,  on  being 
refused,  said  they  had  come  to  the  city  to  see  him  and  that  they 
would  call  again  in  the  morning,  for  a  private  interview,  and, 
if  they  did  not  get  it,  they  would  cut  his  d — d  throat,  before  the 
next  night.  The  situation  alarmed  Sumner's  friends  and  they 
arranged  to  be  with  him,  John  Sherman  and  Burlingame  sleep 
ing  in  his  apartments,  in  a  bedroom  adjoining  his  own.  Others 
accompanied  him  to  and  from  the  Capitol.  Such  was  the  con 
dition  of  affairs  in  Washington  in  the  months  preceding  the 
War! 

The  sequel  showed  that  Sumner  judged  better  than  his 
colleagues  the  public  pulse.  There  had  been  so  much  politics 
mixed  with  the  discussion  of  the  slavery  question,  adjustment 
and  compromise,  the  balancing  of  rights,  even  a  measurement 
of  the  length  discussion  should  go  in  Congress,  that  the  people 
had  grown  tired.  In  their  sturdy  integrity,  they  could  not  see 
the  reason  for  all  these  limitations.  Sumner  had  abandoned 
them  and  had  struck  at  the  heart  of  the  question.  At  last  the 
essential  character  of  slavery,  as  one  mind  saw  it,  had  been 
frankly  laid  open  in  Congress.  And  the  people  praised  it. 
And  in  the  Presidential  campaign  which  followed,  perhaps  in 
duced  by  the  demand  for  such  a  discussion,  Republican  speakers 
generally  pursued  the  same  course  in  discussing  slavery.  De 
mands  for  Sumner  as  a  campaign  speaker  were  pressing.  He 
consented  to  deliver  an  address  to  the.  Young  Men's  Republi 
can  Union  at  Cooper  Institute  in  New  York  City  on  his  way  to 
Boston.  A  large  audience  greeted  him  and  he  spoke  of  the 
Republican  Party,  its  Origin,  Necessity  and  Permanence. 
But,  guarding  his  health,  he  declined  all  invitations  to  speak 
during  the  campaign,  outside  of  Massachusetts. 

Sumner's  speech  on  The  Barbarism  of  Slavery  was  the  last 
speech,  on  the  general  question  of  slavery,  in  Congress.  It 
closed  the  discussion,  which  had  occupied  Congress,  with  ever 
increasing  acrimony,  since  the  formation  of  the  Republic. 
The  next  day,  after  a  brief  consideration  of  some  questions  of 
the  boundary  of  the  proposed  state,  the  bill  for  the  admission  of 
Kansas  was  laid  aside  in  the  Senate;  there  was  a  brush  upon 
the  same  questions,  in  the  House,  a  week  later  and  then  Con 
gress  adjourned.  The  election  of  Lincoln  followed.  When 
Congress  met  again  the  South  was  going  off  on  its  mad  career 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  397 

of  Secession.  The  battle  was  transferred  to  other  fields.  No 
one  was  left  in  Congress  to  defend  Slavery  and  before  the  re 
turn  of  its  friends,  Emancipation  had  been  proclaimed  and  the 
Country  was  free. 

The  Presidential  campaign  of  1860,  was  acrimonious.  The 
National  Democratic  Convention  had  divided,  one  faction  nom 
inating  John  C.  Breckinridge  of  Kentucky,  and  another 
Stephen  A.  Douglas  of  Illinois.  An  organization  styling  itself 
the  Constitutional -Union  Party  had  nominated  John  Bell  of 
Tennessee  for  President,  with  Edward  Everett  of  Massachusetts 
for  Vice-President.  These  parties  were  all  pro-slavery.  Doug 
las  had  no  hope  in  the  South,  and  Breckinridge  had  none  in 
the  North.  The  real  opponent  of  Breckinridge  in  the  South 
was  the  Bell-Everett  party,  for  Bell  was  a  slave-holder  and 
Everett  was  for  peace  at  any  price,  which  meant,  of  course,  that 
he  would  submit  to  Southern  domination.  Abraham  Lincoln 
of  Illinois  and  Hannibal  Hamlin  of  Maine  had  been  nominated 
by  the  Eepublicans.  Thus  the  Democrats  entered  the  contest 
hopelessly  divided ;  the  division  within  their  own  ranks  de 
stroying  every  reasonable  hope  of  success ;  while  the  nomination 
of  Everett,  a  Boston  man,  of  high  character  and  ability,  and 
personally  popular,  who  had  for  years  deprecated  the  strife 
between  the  North  and  the  South  and  had  sincerely  done  much 
to  allay  it,  added  to  the  strength  of  his  party  in  Massachusetts. 
He  had  a  large  influence  with  the  conservative  element  in  Bos 
ton  which  Hannibal  Hamlin  of  the  neighboring  State  of  Maine 
on  the  ticket  with  Lincoln  could  not  outweigh.  The  Republi 
cans  of  Massachusetts  had  nominated  John  A.  Andrew,  of 
Boston,  for  Governor,  and  Anson  G.  Burlingame  was  again  the 
candidate,  in  Sumner's  District,  for  Congress. 

Naturally  Sumner  felt  a  deep  interest  in  the  result.  John 
A.  Andrew,  had  occupied  offices  near  him,  when  he  was  prac 
tising  law,  and  the  early  friendship  then  commenced  had 
continued,  with  increasing  strength,  as  they  became  interested 
in  the  anti-slavery  conflict.  Burlingame  had  already  been  a 
Member  of  Congress  and  was  Sumner's  most  constant  friend  in 
the  House.  He  felt  a  personal  interest  in  his  return.  Sumner's 
anxiety  for  the  result  was  increased  by  the  attitude  of  the  Bell- 
Everett  people,  the  rump  of  the  Webster  Whigs,  with  whom, 
since  his  first  appearance  in  politics,  he  had  been  in  constant 
antagonism].  But  above  all  Jocal  considerations,  was  the 
national  triumph,  which  he  hoped  for  the  cause,  for  which  he 
had  labored  so  long  and  suffered  so  much.  Until  now  success 
had  seemed  far  away  and  though  he  never  doubted  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  the  eternal  principles  of  right  as  he  saw  them,  he 


398  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

was  compelled  to  confess  oftentimes  that  the  great  day  might 
be  far  away.  But  now  the  unexpected  and  hopeless  division 
of  the  Democrats  seemed  to  open  a  great  opportunity.  If  the 
Republicans  could  only  succeed  in  obtaining  control  of  the 
National  Government,  he  thought  the  onward  march  of  Slavery 
could  be  checked. 

Simmer  entered  into  the  campaign,  in  his  own  State,  with 
a  will.  As  early  as  July  thirtieth,  in  an  open  letter  he  pre 
dicted  the  success  of  Lincoln.  He  continued  to  urge  his  friends 
to  increased  effort,  with  this  end  in  view,  till  the  day  of  the 
election.  He  spoke  before  the  Massachusetts  State  Convention, 
which  was  held  at  Worcester,  on  the  "  Presidential  Candidates 
and  the  Issues."  With  Henry  L.  Dawes,  his  successor  in  the 
Senate,  and  Henry  Wilson  his  colleague  he  addressed  an  open- 
air  mass  meeting  at  Myricks  Station;  and  again,  with  Senators 
Wilson  and  John  P.  Hale  and  the  candidate  for  Governor, 
John  A.Andrew,  he  addressed  an  open-air  meeting  at  Fram- 
ingham,  on  the  "  Threat  of  Disunion  by  the  Slave  States  "  and 
again,  at  Worcester,  he  spoke  for  the  Republican  candidate  for 
Congress  on  the  theme  No  Popular  Sovereignty  in  Territories 
can  establish  Slavery.  Eli  Thayer  had  been  elected  to  Con 
gress  from  that  District  as  a  Free-Soiler,  but  he  had  been  se 
duced  by  the  Douglas  theory  of  Popular  Sovereignty,  and  gone 
off  from  his  Party,  on  this  question.  When  a  candidate  this 
year  for  renomination,  before  the  Republican  convention,  he 
had  been  defeated  by  Goldsmith  F.  Bailey.  Thayer  then  came 
out  as  an  independent  candidate.  The  contest  was  close.  When 
it  was  announced  that  Sumner  was  to  speak  for  Bailey,  Thayer 
challenged  him  to  a  joint  discussion,  fearing  the  effect  of  his 
speech ;  Sumner  declined,  and  spoke  to  a  crowded  house,  many, 
unable  to  secure  even  standing  room,  being  turned  away.  Bai 
ley  was  elected  and  Sumner  was  given  the  credit  of  having 
turned  the  tide  in  his  favor.  Before  the  expiration  of  his 
term,  however,  Bailey  died  and  Sumner  was  called  upon,  in 
his  place  in  the  Senate,  to  pronounce  his  eulogy. 

On  the  evening  before  the  election,  Sumner  presided  and 
spoke  at  a  meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall,  Boston,  where  he  declared 
that  the  next  day  they  would  not  only  choose  a  new  President, 
but  a  new  government,  and  he  especially  emphasized  the  impor 
tance  of  voting  for  the  Republican  candidates  from  Boston. 
Burlingame  and  Rice,  rather  than  the  Bell-Everett  candidates 
Appleton  and  Bigelow.  He  declared  that  the  latter  if  elected, 
with  all  New  England  and  the  North  against  them,  would  be 
as  solitary,  at  Washington,  as  Robinson  Crusoe  and  Friday  on 
their  island.  The  Bell-Everett  party,  he  said,  from  its  lofty 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  399 

airs  in  Boston,  reminded  him  of  Brahmins,  who  imagine  them 
selves  of  better  clay  than  others,  or  of  Chinese,  who  imagine 
themselves  cousins  of  the  Sun  and  Moon. 

But  the  influence  of  Sumner's  speeches  reached  by  the  press, 
was  much  larger  than  that  by  his  voice.  The  careful  prep 
aration  that  he  gave  them,  usually  writing  them  out  before 
delivery,  the  animosity  of  the  South  towards  him,  the  assault  by 
Brooks  and  his  recognized  leadership,  among  anti-slavery  men, 
all  conspired  to  give  them  an  especial  interest.  A  very  large 
edition  of  his  speech  on  The  Barbarism  of  Slavery  was  printed 
in  Washington  immediately  after  its  delivery,  another  at 
Boston  with  a  portrait  and  another  at  San  Francisco,  with 
the  Republican  platform.  Besides  being  printed  in  the  Times, 
Herald,  Tribune  and  World,  in  full,  there  was  a  pamphlet 
edition  of  more  than  50,000  copies,  of  his  speech  on  the  Origin, 
Necessity  and  Permanence  of  the  Republican  Party,  printed 
and  distributed  by  the  Young  Men's  Republican  Union  of  New 
York;  while  an  edition  of  10,000  copies  of  the  same  speech  was 
printed  and  distributed  by  the  Republican  Central  Committee 
of  California.  A  Boston  journal  printed  10,000  copies  of  his 
speech  at  Worcester,  for  Mr.  Bailey  to  distribute  in  his  dis 
trict. 

These  facts  sustain  the  deliberate  judgment  of  an  eminent 
witness  of  the  events,  Mr.  Blaine,  who  years  afterwards,  wrote : 
that  Sumner  "  did  more  than  any  other  man  to  promote  the 
anti-slavery  cause,  and  to  uprear  its  standard  in  the  Republican 
party.  *  *  *  His  written  arguments  were  the  anti-slavery 
Classics  of  the  day,  and  they  were  read  more  eagerly  than 
speeches  which  produced  greater  effect  on  the  hearer.  Colonel 
Benton  said  that  William  Pinkney  of  Maryland  was  always 
thinking  of  the  few  hundred  who  came  to  hear  him  in  the  Sen 
ate  Chamber,  apparently  forgetting  the  million  who  might  read 
him  outside.  Mr.  Sumner  never  made  that  mistake.  His  ar 
guments  went  to  the  million.  They  produced  a  wide  spread 
and  prodigious  effect  on  public  opinion  and  left  an  indelible 
impression  on  the  history  of  the  country." 

The  result  of  the  election  of  1860  was  a  great  victory  for  the 
Republicans.  Lincoln  had  in  Massachusetts  almost  twice  as 
many  votes  as  all  the  other  candidates  together.  In  the  elec 
toral  colleges,  he  had  one  hundred  and  eighty  votes;  while  all 
the  others  had  only  one  hundred  and  twenty-three.  The  result 
showed  that  even  without  the  split  in  the  Democratic  party,  its 
candidate  could  not  have  been  elected.  The  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  was  Republican;  the  Senate  was  still  held  by  the 
Democrats,  by  a  reduced  majority.  Andrew  was  elected  Gov- 


400  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

ernor  and  entered  upon  a  career  that  established  him  as  one  of 
the  most  famous  in  the  circle  of  War  Governors.  But  in  all 
Sumner's  rejoicing,  there  was  a  distinct  note  of  sadness.  Bur- 
lingame  was  defeated,  for  Congress,  by  Appleton,  by  less  than 
three  hundred  votes.  It  cut  off  the  promise  of  a  bright  Con 
gressional  career  and  removed  one  of  the  supports,  on  which 
Sumner  constantly  leaned.  President  Lincoln,  however,  rec 
ognizing  the  injustice  of  the  popular  verdict,  afterwards  ap 
pointed  him  Minister  to  China  and  there,  and  in  the  service 
of  the  Chinese  Empire,  he  continued,  until  his  death,  in  1870, 
at  the  age  of  forty-nine. 

During  this  year  Sumner  lost  his  friend,  John  W.  Brown, 
his  college  classmate  and  room  mate.  He  died  May  1,  1860. 
Brown  was  commemorated  by  Sumner  by  a  contribution  to 
a  little  volume,  printed  in  memoriam.  Sumner  was  warmly  at 
tached  to  him.  Of  all  his  classmates,  he  thought  he  gave,  in 
college,  the  largest  promise  of  future  eminence.  He  was  a 
bright,  wayward  fellow,  of  a  bold  and  independent  habit  of 
thought.  It  was  feared  his  waywardness  might  sometime  wreck 
his  prospects.  Sumner  may  have  caught  from  him  something 
of  the  spirit  of  the  iconoclast,  which  he  showed,  when  he  de 
livered  his  oration  on  The  True  Grandeur  of  Nations,  advocat 
ing  universal  place,  before  the  soldiery  of  Boston,  and  again 
when  he  maintained  his  long  struggle  against  slavery.  Little 
were  Brown's  friends,  of  his  college  days,  prepared  to  expect  of 
him  the  quiet,  peaceful,  unobtrusive  life  he  afterwards  led. 
After  a  short  term,  in  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  he  put 
aside  a  nomination  for  State  Senator  and  thereafter  disappeared 
from  public  life  entirely,  caring  little  for  political  influence,  and 
hardly  known,  except  to  a  few  intimates.  So  that  Sumner 
could  suggest  of  him,  when  gone,  the  questionable  praise,  "  Bene 
vivit,  qui  bene  latuit." 

During  this  summer,  Sumner  prepared  a  lecture  on  the  char 
acter  of  Lafayette.  It  was  first  delivered  in  Tremont  Temple 
in  Boston,  on  October  1,  1860,  though  it  was  afterward  repeated 
at  Concord,  Lowell  and  Providence  and,  on  his  way  to  Washing 
ton,  at  Cooper  Institute,  in  New  York  City,  and,  during  the 
Congressional  vacation,  at  Philadelphia.  At  Concord,  he  was 
the  guest  of  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson  and  responded  to  a  serenade 
from  his  front  door.  At  the  lecture,  in  New  York,  William 
Cullen  Bryant  presided.  From  Philadelphia,  after  the  lecture 
had  been  announced,  Sumner  received  a  letter,  from  the  pres 
ident  of  the  institute,  under  whose  auspices  it  was  to  be  de 
livered,  asking  him  to  omit  any  reference  to  slavery.  Sumner 
replied  that  he  could  not  be  guilty  of  such  infidelity,  in  de- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  401 

lineating  the  life  of  one,  whose  whole  career  had  been  devoted 
to  the  cause  of  human  freedom,  that  it  would  be  akin  to  the 
conduct  of  the  pirates  of  the  Caribbean  sea,  who  repeated  the 
Ten  Commandments  omitting,  "  Thou  shalt  not  steal."  And 
he  added :  "  For  many  years  I  have  addressed  associations, 
societies  and  meetings  of  all  kinds;  but  never  before  have  I 
been  met  by  any  hint  of  interference  with  the  completest  lati 
tude  of  speech,  according  to  my  sense  of  the  duties  and  pro 
prieties  of  the  occasion.  Long  accustomed  to  free  speech,  I  am 
too  old  now  to  renounce  it.  *  *  *  Of  course  my  place  in  your 
list  is  now  vacant."  The  limitation,  however,  was  afterwards 
withdrawn  and  Sumner  spoke,  according  to  the  appointment, 
to  a  crowded  house. 

The  purpose  of  the  lecture  was  to  express  the  admiration  he 
felt,  for  the  character  of  a  truly  good  and  great  man.  He  had 
been  attracted  to  Lafayette's  career,  during  his  protracted  stay 
in  Paris,  while  under  the  care  of  Dr.  Brown-Sequard.  He  had, 
it  will  be  remembered,  visited  his  grave  within  the  circle  of 
the  old  walls  of  the  cemetery  of  Picpus,  watched  over  by  white- 
hooded  nuns,  of  the  neighboring  convent.  A  little  later  he  had 
visited  his  family  seat,  La  Grange,  a  picturesque  and  venerable 
castle,  with  its  towers  and  moat  and  drawbridge,  its  gate 
hung  by  ivy,  planted  by  the  English  statesman,  Charles  James 
Fox,  and  "a  large  courtyard  within,  embosomed  with  trees, 
except  on  one  side,  where  a  beautiful  lawn  spread  its  verdure." 
Some  of  these  items  of  personal  interest  he  incorporated  in  his 
lecture.  Again  he  revealed  his  sympathy  with  noble  lives  and 
his  talent  for  commemorative  oratory.  The  lecture  contained 
passages  of  beauty,  hardly  excelled  by  any  in  all  his  works. 

Slavery  was  to  Lafayette  "  a  most  lamentable  drawback,  on 
the  example  of  independence  and  freedom,  presented  to  the 
world,  by  the  United  States."  It  was  this  lesson  from  his  life 
that  Sumner  wished  especially  to  impress, — his  fidelity  to  free 
dom  everywhere.  In  the  United  States  there  was  a  crisis  ap 
proaching,  upon  this  question.  Slavery  was  making  new  de 
mands  and  new  threats ;  and  Sumner  thought  it  important  to 
strengthen  the  hearts  of  the  people  of  the  North,  by  holding  up 
before  them,  the  example  of  Lafayette  and  calling  their  atten 
tion,  to  those  scenes  in  the  life  of  one,  so  justly  and  universally 
revered  by  Americans,  showing  his  devotion  to  the  cause  of 
universal  freedom  and  the  equality  of  all  men  before  the  law. 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

COMPROMISE SECESSION SUMNER       AGAINST        CONCESSION — 

BALTIMORE  MOBS — EMANCIPATION 

SUMNER  was  in  his  seat  at  the  opening  of  Congress,  on  the 
fourth  of  December,  I860.  It  then  became  certain  that  the 
South  was  determined  to  secede.  The  Message  of  President 
Buchanan  to  Congress  recognized  this  and  declared  his  in 
ability  to  control  the  seceding  States.  Powell  of  Kentucky,  in 
the  Senate  moved  the  appointment  of  a  committee,  to  consider 
this  part  of  the  President's  Message,  to  inquire  into  the  dis 
tracted  condition  of  the  country,  the  grievances  between  the 
North  and  the  South  and  to  report,  by  bill  or  otherwise.  This 
resolution,  after  some  debate,  was  adopted,  on  December  eigh 
teenth.  During  the  debate,  Sumner  read,  in  the  Senate,  an 
unpublished  autograph  letter  of  Andrew  Jackson,  written, 
just  after  his  conflict  with  the  Nullifiers  in  1833,  to  Eev. 
A.  J.  Crawford ;  in  which  Jackson  declared,  that  the  tariff  was 
only  the  pretext  for  Nullification,  that  Disunion  and  a  Southern 
Confederacy  was  the  real  object  and  that  the  next  pretext 
would  be  the  Slavery  question.  At  the  time  the  letter  was  read, 
Crawford  was  living  in  the  South  and  its  use  made  his  surround 
ings  so  unpleasant  that  he  soon  destroyed  it.  On  the  thirty- 
first  of  December,  the  Committee  had  to  report  that  they  were 
unable  to  agree  upon  any  plan  of  adjustment.  Yet  leading  men 
of  both  parties  were  on  the  Committee,  Breckinridge,  Hunter, 
Toombs,  Douglas  and  Jefferson  Davis,  of  the  Democrats;  Sew- 
ard,  Collamer,  Crittenden  and  Wade  of  the  Republicans. 

On  December  eighteenth,  Crittenden  brought  forward  prop 
ositions  of  compromise.,  since  known  as  the  "Crittenden  Prop 
ositions/'  They  proposed  to  prohibit  slavery  North  of  36° 
30',  but  declared,  that  in  all  territory  south  of  this  line,  now 
held,  or  hereafter  to  be  acquired,  Slavery  of  the  African  race 
was  to  be  recognized,  as  existing,  and  should  not  be  interfered 
with  by  Congress  but  protected,  by  the  territorial  governments ; 
and  all  territory,  north  or  south  of  the  line,  was  to  be  admitted, 
with  or  without  slavery,  as  the  constitution  of  the  new  States 
might  provide.  Congress  was  to  have  no  power  to  abolish 
slavery,  in  places  under  its  jurisdiction,  nor  within  the  limits  of 
slave-holding  States,  nor  within  the  District  of  Columbia,  while 

402 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  403 

either  Virginia  or  Maryland  continued  slave  States.  By  con 
stitutional  amendment,  the  United  States  was  to  pay  the 
owner  for  a  fugitive  slave,  if  obstructed  in  the  recovery  of  him ; 
and  no  future  amendment  of  the  Constitution  should  give  Con 
gress  power,  to  abolish  or  interfere  with  slavery,  in  any  of  the 
States ;  the  elective  franchise,  and  the  right  to  hold  office,  should 
not  be  exercised  by  persons,  in  whole  or  in  part  of  the  African 
race. 

These  were  extreme  measures.  For  the  Eepublicans  to 
agree  to  them,  meant  to  give  up  all  they  had  fought  for,  in 
the  late  election,  and  more.  The  propositions  proposed  to 
carry  slavery,  into  the  Territories,  and  to  fix  all  South  of 
36°'30/  as  slave  and  all  States  everywhere,  whether  north  or 
south,  of  that  line,  as  slave,  if  the  people,  when  seeking  admis 
sion,  adopted  a  pro-slavery  constitution.  Congress  was  to  have 
no  power  to  abolish  slavery  anywhere.  The  Constitution  was 
-to  be  amended,  so  as,  to  confirm  forever,  this  condition,  to 
strengthen  the  fugitive  slave  law,  to  remove  from  Congress  the 
power  to  interfere  with  slavery,  in  any  State,  and  finally,  to 
take  from  free  colored  people,  the  right  to  vote  and  hold  office, 
in  the  few  places,  where  these  rights  were  already  enjoyed. 
Instead  of  restricting  and  curtailing  slavery  and  giving  good 
people  reason  to  hope  for  its  extinction,  it  was  thus  proposed,  to 
strengthen  and  extend  it,  and  fix  it  irrevocably  on  the  Eepub- 
lic.  Such  concessions  were  not  to  be  thought  of  by  liberty  lov 
ing  people. 

Clark,  of  New  Hampshire,  proposed  to  meet  them,  by  counter 
propositions.  He  introduced  in  the  Senate,  on  January  ninth, 
1861,  two  resolutions,  one,  that  the  provisions  of  the  Consti 
tution  were  ample  for  the  preservation  of  the  Union  and  the 
protection  of  the  country,  that  it  needed  to  be  obeyed  rather 
than  amended;  and,  another,  that  to  the  maintenance  of  the 
existing  Union  and  Constitution,  should  be  directed  all  the 
energies  of  the  Government  and  of  all  good  people.  On  motion, 
these  resolutions  of  Clark  were  substituted,  by  a  vote  of  twenty- 
five  to  twenty-three,  Sumner  voting  for  them.  This  result  was 
brought  about  by  the  refusal  of  Southern  Senators  to  vote. 
The  vote  was  afterwards  reconsidered  and  lost,  several  Sena 
tors  desiring  to  vote  on  the  "  Crittenden  Propositions/'  as  in 
troduced.  When  the  Crittenden  propositions  were  voted  on, 
they  were  lost  also,  Sumner  voting  against  them. 

At  the  close  of  the  session,  a  joint  resolution  was  passed  by 
both  the  Senate  and  the  House  proposing  an  amendment  to 
the  Constitution,  to  forbid  Congress,  from  interfering  with 
slavery,  in  any  State,  where  it  already  existed,  Sumner  vot- 


404  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ing  against  it.  This  would  not  have  been  inconsistent  with 
the  position  of  the  Republicans ;  for  even  Lincoln  declared  that 
he  had  no  purpose  to  interfere  with  slavery  where  it  then 
existed.  But  the  amendment  was  never  made. 

Events  were  hurrying  forward.  Southern  Statesmen  them 
selves  hardly  cared  for  a  settlement  of  the  differences.  It  is 
pretty  certain,  that  any  proposition  that  could  have  been  offered, 
short  of  complete  surrender  by  the  North,  would  have  been 
unsatisfactory  to  them.  Andrew  Jackson,  himself  a  Southern 
man,  but  of  incorruptible  honesty  and  unquestioned  patriot 
ism,  had  only  declared,  what  his  clear  head  distinctly  saw,  at 
the  time  of  the  nullification  trouble,  when  he  said,  their  object 
was,  neither  the  tariff,  nor  slavery,  but  a  Southern  Confederacy. 
They  might  by  their  action  have  defeated  the  adoption  of  the 
Clark  Resolution,  in  the  Senate.  They  might  have  adopted  the 
Crittenden  Propositions.  But  they  refused  to  do  either.  They 
absented  themselves  purposely  and,  when  present,  refused  to 
vote.  Nor  did  they  seem  to  care  seriously  what  the  North  did. 
Their  real  leaders  took  little  or  no  part.  They  were  busy,  how 
ever,  inflaming  the  minds  of  the  people  of  the  South,  and  in 
citing  them,  to  take  the  steps  at  home,  that  had  already  been 
resolved  upon  in  Washington. 

Sumner  was  unwilling  to  yield  to  them,  in  anything.  In  a 
letter  to  Governor  Andrew,  on  January  eighteenth,  1861,  he 
wrote :  "  The  question  must  be  met  on  the  Constitution  as  it  is 
and  the  facts  as  tliey  are,  or  we  shall  hereafter  hold  our  Govern 
ment,  subject  to  this  asserted  right  of  secession.  Should  we 
yield  now, — and  any  offer  is  concession, — every  Presidential 
election  will  be  conducted,  with  menace  of  secession,  by  the 
defeated  party."  (  He  held  to  this  ground,  notwithstanding 
every  effort  of  the  peace  party,  to  move  him.  Under  the  great 
pressure  that  was  being  exerted,  Charles  Francis  Adams,  one 
of  Sumner's  most  unswerving  supporters,  in  the  earlier  work, 
for  Freedom,  and,  who  was  now  in  Congress,  had  yielded  and 
was  offering  propositions  of  compromise.  Seward  also  had 
weakened  and,  in  a  speech  in  the  Senate,  which  he  had  read 
over  to  Sumner  before  its  delivery,  and  which  Sumner  un 
successfully  attempted  to  dissuade  him  from  delivering,  he 
receded  from  the  high  ground  the  Republicans  had  taken. 
When  such  men  yielded,  it  showed  the  condition  of  the  public 
mind  and  the  pressure  that  was  being  exerted. 

But  Sumner  stood  firm.  He  alone,  of  the  whole  Massachu 
setts  delegation,  in  Congress,  refused  to  sign  a  recommendation, 
to  the  Governor  of  the  State,  asking  the  appointment  of  Com 
missioners,  to  attend  a  Peace  Conference,  proposed  by  the  Gen- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  405 

eral  Assembly  of  Virginia.  He  declared,  that  any  change  in 
the  attitude  of  firmness  thus  far  maintained  by  the  North, 
could  have  no  other  effect  than  the  encouragement  of  treason. 
It  was  thought  best,  however,  by  the  Governor,  to  appoint  these 
Commissioners  to  prevent  others  in  Washington  from  assuming 
to  take  their  place  and  misrepresenting  the  loyal  feeling  of  the 
State.  All  the  Commissioners  so  appointed  were  firm  against 
any  concession  to  Slavery  and  so  voted  in  the  Conference. 

At  the  request  of  Governor  Andrew,  Sumner  went  to  Pres 
ident  Buchanan  to  offer  military  aid,  from  the  State  to  the  Gov 
ernment,  in  its  peril.  When  he  had  finished  his  conference, 
upon  this  subject,  and  was  about  to  retire,  he  asked  the  Presi 
dent  if  there  was  anything  else  Massachusetts  could  do,  for  the 
good  of  the  country.  "Yes,"  said  President  Buchanan,  "vote" 
for  the  Crittenden  Propositions."  The  President  greatly 
desired  their  adoption,  thinking  this  would  bring  peace  to  the 
country.  But  Sumner  replied  that,  while  Massachusetts  had 
not  yet  spoken,  he  felt  authorized  to  say,  that  such  was  the  un 
alterable  conviction  of  her  people,  that  they  would  see  their 
State  sunk  in  the  sea,  and  turned  into  a  sandbank,  before  they 
would  adopt  propositions,  giving  slavery  constitutional  protec 
tion,  in  the  Territories,  and  disfranchising  a  portion  of  her 
population. 

A  Boston  Committee,  headed  by  Edward  Everett,  lately  a  ; 
candidate  for  Vice-President,  came  on  to  Washington,  to  urge 
an  adjustment,  by  mutual  surrenders.  Everett  called  upon 
Sumner  and  urged  him  to  bring  forward  some  conciliatory 
proposition,  saying  he  was  the  only  person  who  could  do  it,  with 
a  chance  of  success.  But  Sumner  replied  that,  if  he  was  strong 
in  the  North,  it  was  only  because  the  people  there  were  con 
vinced  he  would  not  compromise,  but  the  moment  he  com 
promised,  he  too  would  be  lost. 

Thus  far,  Sumner  had  refrained  from  speaking,  believing 
firmness,  with  silence,  to  be  the  best  course.  But  on  February 
twelfth,  Crittenden  presented,  in  the  Senate,  a  petition  signed 
by  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  reciting  that  their  sentiments 
towards  the  Union  and  country,  were  being  misrepresented  and 
misunderstod,  that  they  were  willing  all  parts  of  the  country 
should  have  equal  rights  and  that  they  recognized  in  the  Crit 
tenden  Propositions  a  basis  of  settlement,  on  which,  both  the 
North  and  the  South,  might  unite  and  thus  restore  peace,  to 
the  country.  The  petition  purported  to  come  from  one  hun 
dred  and  eighty-two  towns  and  villages  and  cities  of  Massa 
chusetts  and  to  be  signed  by  22,313  citizens.  Crittenden,  in 
presenting  it,  remarked  upon  the  number  from  Nantic,  where 


406        LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Senator  Wilson  lived,  and  Boston,  the  home  of  Sumner,  where 
there  were  more  than  14,000  petitioners  out  of  19,000  voters. 
He  moved  that  the  petition  be  laid  on  the  table,  which  cut  off 
debate.  But  Sumner  moved  that  it  be  printed,  and,  on  this 
motion,  spoke. 

He  declared  that  the  signers  of  the  petition  must  have  been 
ignorant  of  the  character  of  the  Crittenden  Propositions,  that 
these  propositions  went  beyond  the  Breckinridge  platform, 
which  had  been  condemned  by  the  people,  in  the  election  of 
Lincoln;  and,  if  adopted,  would  set  aside  the  Eepublican  plat 
form,  on  which  that  election  was  carried,  and  would  foist,  into 
the  Constitution,  provisions,  which  the  framers  of  the  instru 
ment  had  never  sanctioned,  and  to  which  they  would  never  have 
consented,  extending  the  protection  of  the  Constitution  itself, 
over  slavery,  south  of  latitude  36°  30',  and  carrying  it  to  every 
future  acquisition  of  territory  there,  while  making  freedom 
more  impossible,  at  the  North,  with  every  incoming  State  pos 
sessing  the  right  to  come  in  as  a  slave  State,  giving  new  guar 
antees  to  slavery,  in  the  National  Capitol,  facilitating  the 
transportation  of  slaves  from  State  to  State,  strengthening  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  then,  as  if  attempting  to  do  something 
especially  obnoxious  to  Massachusetts,  proposing  to  despoil  her 
colored  citizens  of  political  franchises  they  had  enjoyed  before 
the  National  Constitution  was  adopted,  and  had  continued  to 
enjoy  ever  since.  While  he  had  infinite  respect  for  the  right  of 
petition,  and  hoped  always  to  promote  the  interests  and 
represent  the  wishes  of  his  constituents,  he  unhesitatingly 
declared,  that  these  petitioners  had  missed  the  opportunity  of 
asking  two  things,  altogether  sufficient  for  this  crisis,  first,  that 
the  Constitution  be  preserved  intact ;  second,  that  the  verdict  of 
the  people,  in  the  election  of  Lincoln,  be  enforced,  without 
price  or  condition.  He  insisted  there  was  but  one  thing  for  the 
North  to  do,  and  that  was  to  stand  firm.  In  answer  to  Crit- 
tenden's  inquiry,  why,  if  his  propositions  were  not  right,  he 
did  not  move  to  amend  them,  Sumner  answered  that  he  had 
missed  no  opportunity,  direct  or  indirect,  from  beginning  to 
end,  of  voting  against  every  word  and  every  line  of  them,  and 
that  he  had  voted  for  Clark's  substitute,  which  would  have  dis 
placed  them  entirely,  and  that  this  substitute  expressed  his  con 
viction  exactly. 

Called  out  by  this  speech,  it  was  freely  declared,  by  well-in 
formed  persons  in  Boston,  some  of  them  signers,  that  the  peti 
tion  had  been  signed  ignorantly  by  a  great  many.  But  the 
Common  Council  of  Boston  made  haste  to  pass  a  formal  resolu 
tion,  censuring  Sumner,  and  declaring  that  his  assertion  in  the 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  407 

Senate,  about  the  petitioners  was  "  undignified,  unbecoming  a 
Senator,  and  a  citizen  of  Boston,  and  untrue."  The  Common 
Council  was  then  controlled  by  the  Compromisers.  It  after 
wards  appeared  that  the  petition  had  been  placed,  at  a  public 
place,  in  the  Boston  post-office,  in  charge  of  a  crier,  who  asked 
every  one  who  passed  to  sign,  that  boys  and  foreigners,  and 
such,  as  well  as  citizens,  did  sign  thoughtlessly ;  and  that  after 
wards  the  city  police  canvassed  the  out  of  the  way  places,  with 
it,  getting  everybody  to  sign  it  who  would. 

An  effort  was  also  made,  in  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts, 
as  in  some  of  the  other  States,  to  procure  a  repeal  of  the  Per 
sonal  Liberty  Laws.  These  were  laws,  passed  for  the  protection 
of  free  citizens,  against  abuses,  growing  up  under  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law.  One  of  the  complaints  of  the  South  was  that  it  was 
hindered  in  the  recovery  of  its  slaves,  by  these  laws.  An  appeal 
to  the  Legislature,  to  make  this  concession  to  the  South,  was 
signed  by  a  large  number  of  prominent  citizens  of  Boston, 
headed  by  Judge  Shaw,  until  lately  Chief  Justice  of  the  State. 
Sumner  firmly  resisted  any  such  concession  and  was  in  almost 
daily  correspondence  with  Governor  Andrew  to  prevent  it. 
His  letters,  beseeching  them  not  to  make  any  such  unseemly 
surrender  to  the  South,  were  handed  around  among  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Legislature,  and  aided  materially  in  preventing  it. 

He  wrote  to  Governor  Andrew,  January  twenty-third: 
"  Nothing,  that  Massachusetts  can  do  now,  can  arrest  one 
single  State.  There  can  be  no  other  result,  except  our  own 
humiliation,  and  a  bad  example,  which  will  be  felt  by  all  other 
States.  If  Massachusetts  yields  one  hair's  breadth,  other  States 
may  yield  an  inch  or  foot,  a  furlong,  or  a  mile.  Pray  keep 
the  Legislature  firm.  Don't  let  them  undo  anything  ever  done 
for  Freedom." 

Sumner  did  not  mistake  the  gravity  of  the  situation.  Prob 
ably  no  man,  in  public  life,  had  a  clearer  view  of  what  was  in 
store  for  us,  than  he.  For  years  he  had  been  in  the  midst  of 
the  conflict.  He  knew  the  temper  of  the  South  and  its  leaders ; 
and  he  could  appreciate  what  they  were  about  to  do,  and  what 
the  outcome  of  it  would  be.  He  made  no  effort  to  conceal  his 
convictions,  or  to  mislead  his  friends.  "  We  are  on  the  eve  of 
great  events,"  he  wrote  William  Claflin,  Chairman  of  the  Re 
publican  State  Committee  and  President  of  the  Senate  of  Mass 
achusetts,  "  and  this  month  will  try  men's  souls.  But  our 
duty  is  as  clear  as  noonday."  The  same  month,  January,  1861, 
he  wrote  Count  Gurowski :  "  The  slave  States  are  mad.  They 
will  all  move.  Nothing  now,  but  abject  humiliation,  on  the 
part  of  the  North  can  stay  them.  Nobody  can  foresee  precisely 


408  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

all  that  is  in  the  future,  but  I  do  not  doubt  that  any  conflict 
will  precipitate  the  doom  of  Slavery.  It  will  probably  go  down 
in  blood/'  "  My  opinion/7  he  wrote  Governor  Andrew,  Jan 
uary  twenty-sixth,  "  has  been  fixed  for  a  long  time.  All  the 
slave  States  will  go,  except  Delaware,  and  perhaps  Maryland 
and  Missouri, — to  remain  with  us  Free  States." 

These  opinions  were  constantly  realized  by  events.  Within 
two  weeks  after  the  opening  of  Congress  and  the  appointment 
of  the  committee  of  thirteen  and  within  two  days  after  Critten- 
den  offered  in  the  Senate  his  propositions  of  Compromise, 
South  Carolina,  without  waiting  to  see  the  result  of  either,  on 
December  twentieth,  1860,  adopted  an  ordinance  of  secession 
and  proceeded  to  raise  the  Palmetto  Flag  over  the  custom  house 
and  post-office  at  Charleston.  Other  States  followed,  in  quick 
succession,  Mississippi,  January  ninth,  1861 ;  Florida,  January 
tenth;  Alabama,  January  eleventh;  Georgia,  January  nine 
teenth  ;  Louisiana,  January  twenty-sixth.  Texas  followed, 
February  first,  Arkansas,  North  Carolina,  Virginia  and  Ten 
nessee  were  merely  waiting  and  soon  to  follow.  The  seceding 
States  were  demanding  the  removal  .of  the  National  troops  from 
their  territory  and  the  surrender  to  them  of  the  fortifications 
and  custom  houses  and  post-offices,  within  their  borders.  The 
Senators  of  the  seceding  States  withdrew  from  the  Senate,  on 
January  twenty-first.  The  President's  Cabinet  too  was  melting 
away,  before  Secession.  Cobb,  of  Georgia,  left  the  Treasury 
bankrupt,  December  tenth;  Floyd,  after  transferring  the  mili 
tary  resources  of  the  country  to  the  forts  of  the  South,  and  then 
withdrawing  the  National  troops  from  them,  left  the  War 
Department,  December  twenty-ninth;  Thompson,  as  disloyal 
as  either  of  the  others,  left  the  Interior  Department  January 
eighth.  No  especial  regret  was  felt  by  loyal  people,  when  they 
left.  It  would  have  been  better  for  the  country  if  they  had 
gone  earlier.  They  were  succeeded  by  three  loyal  men.  Edwin 
M.  Stanton,  than  whom  America  never  produced  a  greater  man, 
soon  to  become  the  War  Secretary,  John  A.  Dix  and  Joseph 
Holt,  took  their  places;  and  thenceforward  Buchanan,  in  the 
hands  of  better  men,  became  a  better  President. 

But  it  was  not  the  South  alone  that  had  gone  of?  after  the 
idol  of  Slavery.  Southern  men  had  many  political  friends,  in 
the  North,  who  had  been  associated  with  them,  in  conventions, 
and  in  public  office,  had  voted  with  and  sustained  them,  and 
were  openly,  with  speech  and  pen,  supporting  them  now ;  such 
men,  as  Caleb  Gushing,  of  Massachusetts,  Horatio  Seymour,  of 
New  York,  and  Clement  L.  Valandigham,  of  Ohio.  They 
were  working  vigorously  and  openly,  pointing  to  the  destruc- 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  409 

tion  that  threatened,  and  loudly  calling  on  the  North  to  yield. 
Living  in  the  North  and  a  part  of  it,  themselves  men  of  ability, 
they  were  more  to  be  feared  than  their  friends  in  the  South. 
Their  influence  was  felt.  Even  the  timid  and  weak-kneed  of 
the  Eepublicans,  whose  votes  had  aided  in  the  election  of  Lin 
coln,  were  hesitating.  The  times  were  trying  men  of  stronger 
fibre. 

I  count  it  one  of  the  great  debts  we  owe  Sumner  that  he, 
more  than  any  other  man,  perhaps,  of  the  whole  country,  with 
grim  resolution,  stood  firm  at  this  time  and  kept  the  Eepubli 
cans  true  to  the  work  they  had  undertaken.  He  continued  abso 
lutely  loyal  to  his  convictions,  without  any  sign  of  weakness; 
one  to  whom  all  others  could  turn,  with  assurance,  for  en 
couragement  and  advice.  He  saw  the  situation  clearly  him- 

^self  and  he  never  wanted  confidence  in  his  own  convictions. 

[He  felt  that  now  was  the  hour  of  supreme  peril,  that  to  yield 
meant  to  give  up  all  that  had  been^gained  and  sink  lower,  than 
ever,  in  submission  to  the  South.  He  felt,  too,  that  the  life 
of  our  institutions  was  staked  oh'  the  issue,  that  the  South, 
having  been  beaten  at  the  polls,  should  accept  the  verdict  of  the 
people  and  abide  the  result,  that  any  different  course,  on  her 
part,  was  revolutionary  and  must,  if  persisted  in,  destroy  our 
experiment  in  popular  government.  For  the  North  to  yield, 
was  to  encourage  revolutionary  tendencies. "  He  had  absolute 
confidence  in  the  righteousness  of  his  cause  and  that,  if  war 
came,  victory  must  ultimately  come  out  of  it,  to  the  right,  with 
the  complete  destruction  of  slavery;  and  that  with  all  cause 
for  strife  between  the  sections  removed,  the  country  would 
rise  to  a  new  height  of  prosperity  and  power,  among  the  nations. 
All  he  then  saw,  with  prophetic  instinct,  events  have  since  jus 
tified,,  and  to  him,  and  those  who  stood  with  him,  a  debt  of 
gratitude  is  due. 

The  withdrawal  of  the  Southern  Senators  left  the  Eepub 
licans  with  a  majority  in  the  Senate,  and  gave  them  the  control 
in  the  organization  of  the  committees.  After  the  inauguration 
of  Lincoln,  they  proceeded,  on  the  eighth  of  March,  1861,  to  this 
work.  Sumner  was  made  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Eelations,  one  of  the  most  important  committees  of  the 
Senate,  and  for  whose  work  he  had  an  especial  fitness,  by  reason 
of  his  early  studies  in  international  law  and  his  extensive  travel 
and  acquaintance  in  Europe.  This  fitness  was  recognized  by  the 
press  both  at  home  and  abroad,  at  the  time,  as  a  matter  for 
congratulation.  Mason,  of  Virginia,  had  held  this  chairman 
ship,  since  December,  1851.  Sumner  had  been  a  member  of  the 
Committee  for  two  years,  and  was  destined  to  preside  over  it 


410  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

until  his  removal,,  in  1871-  There  never  was  a  period  when 
graver  questions  came  before  the  Committee,  than  during  the 
years  from  1861  to  1871,  when  Sumner  was  its  Chairman. 
They  were  the  years  of  the  war  and  those  immediately  follow 
ing  it,  when  our  relations  with  foreign  nations  were  frequently 
strained,  as  with  England,  over  the  claims  growing  out  of  the 
depredations  of  the  rebel  cruiser  Alabama,  built  and  manned 
in  Great  Britain.  Except  for  careful  diplomacy  war  might 
have  resulted.  The  first  report  the  Committee  made  under  his 
chairmanship,  was  in  favor  of  the  settlement  of  a  disputed 
question  by  arbitration,  a  means  of  settling  national  differences 
he  had  advocated  in  his  oration  on  The  True  Grandeur  of 
Nations.  The  dispute  was  between  this  country  and  England 
over  the  boundary  line  between  Vancouver's  Island  and  the 
American  Continent. 

The  Senate  continued  in  session,  to  act  on  the  appointments 
of  President  Lincoln,  till  late  in  March.  Sumner,  according 
to  his  custom,  remained  in  Washington  a  few  days,  after  the 
close  of  the  session.  While  he  was  still  there,  Fort  Sumter  was 
fired  upon,  and  President  Lincoln  issued  his  call  for  seventy- 
five  thousand  men.  On  the  afternoon  of  April  eighteenth, 
Sumner  left  Washington  for  home,  stopping  that  night  at 
Baltimore.  Here  he  narrowly  escaped  being  mobbed.  He  put 
up  at  Barnum's  Hotel,  registering  when  he  entered,  in  the 
open  book.  He  took  tea,  however,  and  spent  the  evening  at  the 
home  of  some  friends.  As  he  was  passing  along  the  street,  on 
his  way  to  his  friends,  he  was  recognized,  and  the  report  being 
spread  that  he  was  in  the  city,  a  mob  gathered  and  proceeded 
to  the  hotel  and  demanded  to  see  him.  But  they  were  assured 
that  he  was  not  in  the  hotel,  and  that  they  did  not  know  where 
he  had  gone.  Leaving  his  friends,  about  nine  o'clock,  and 
walking  leisurely  back,  when  near  the  hotel,  Sumner  noticed  an 
excited  crowd  in  the  street,  but,  being  entirely  ignorant  of  the 
cause,  he  turned  into  a  side  entrance  of  the  hotel,  thinking  thus 
to  avoid  the  press.  Going  to  the  clerk's  counter  to  get  his  key, 
he  was  at  once  hurried  into  the  private  office  of  the  proprietor 
and  was  there  told,  by  Mr.  Barnum,  of  his  danger  and  asked, 
for  the  safety  of  himself  as  well  as  of  the  hotel,  that  he  would 
leave  the  house.  Sumner  insisted  that  he  must  claim  the 
rights  of  a  guest,  that  no  other  hotel  would  be  safer  and  that 
he  could  not  think  of  bringing  danger  to  the  home  of  a  friend. 
It  was  finally  arranged  that  he  might  remain  in  the  hotel, 
occupying  one  of  the  rooms,  at  the  end  of  a  long  hall,  in  the 
third  story,  where  all  the  rooms  were  of  one  size  and  where  no 
one,  but  the  proprietor  and  his  confidant  would  know  where  he 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  41 1 

was.  Here  Sumner  remained,  for  the  night;  and  as  he  sat 
by  the  window  he  could  see,  all  unknown  to  them,  the  surging 
of  the  angry  crowd,  who  were  looking  and  waiting  for  him. 
In  the  grey  dawn  of  the  following  morning,  he  left  the  hotel 
and  proceeded  on  his  way  to  Philadelphia.  The  lady  in  whose 
family  he  had  passed  the  previous  evening,  was  notified,  for 
her  own  safety,  to  leave  the  city,  which  she  did,  until  the  excite 
ment  subsided. 

On  the  road  to  Philadelphia,  Sumner  passed  the  Sixth  Massa 
chusetts  regiment,  on  its  way  to  Washington,  in  answer  to  the 
President's  call  for  troops.  They  were  being  carried  in  horse 
cars.  And  in  their  laughter  and  singing  and  prevailing  good 
humor,  they  revealed  the  easy,  joyous  side  of  soldier  life.  In  a 
few  hours,  they  were  in  Baltimore  and  then  they  encountered 
the  other  side.  As  they  were  being  transported  from  the 
Philadelphia,  to  the  Washington  station,  after  part  of  them  had 
reached  the  latter,  the  remainder  en  route  were  set  upon,  by 
a  mob,  the  rails  of  the  track  were  torn  up  and  they  were  obliged 
to  march  through  the  city.  They  were  pelted  with  stones  and 
brick  and  other  missiles  and  then  came  pistol  shots;  when  the 
soldiers  turned  and  fired.  And  thus  they  fought  their  way  for 
two  miles,  to  the  Washington  station.  Four  of  the  soldiers 
were  killed  and  thirty-six  wounded.  Some  of  the  mob  also 
fell.  Thus  was  shed  'the  first  blood  of  the  Civil  War.  That 
night  the  bridges  on  the  Philadelphia  Railroad  were  burned, 
travel  was  cut  off,  over  that  thoroughfare,  and  the  President 
was  notified  by  the  Mayor  of  Baltimore  that  no  more  troops 
could  be  transported  through  that  city.  When  Sumner  reached 
Philadelphia  they  were  reading  bulletins,  telling  of  the  disaster 
to  the  troops  he  had  just  passed,  from  his  own  State.  That 
night  these  same  troops  were  quartered  in  the  Senate  Chamber 
he  had  lately  left,  and  so  the  scene  of  argument  was  transformed 
into  one  of  arms. 

Events  were  fast  hurrying  upon  one  another.  Both  sides  were 
marshalling  armies,  and  every  one  now  believed  that  war  was 
inevitable.  Sumner  saw,  in  it,  a  great  opportunity.  He  was  as 
sure  the  South  could  not  succeed,  as  he  was  that  eternal  prin 
ciples  of  right  ruled  the  world.  He  knew  that  slavery  was  the 
cause  of  all  our  trouble  and  he  felt,  that  the  destruction  of 
slavery,  would  end  the  war.  Slavery  was  wrong,  and  as  it  was 
the  cause  of  the  war,  created  and  maintained  it,  he  believed  that 
the  war  thus  created  could  not  succeed.  The  only  danger  he 
saw,  was,  that  the  North  would  not  place  herself,  in  the  right 
attitude.  He  felt,  that  she  should  squarely  assert  that  she  was 
against  slavery,  against  its  extension  and  believed  it  to  be  wrong, 


412          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  that  Southern  Statesmen,  becoming  convinced  of  this,  had 
persuaded  their  section  to  rebellion,  to  save  slavery.  He  be 
lieved  the  North  should  declare  now,  that  the  war  having  come, 
and  for  this  cause,  that  slavery  must  be  destroyed,  in  the  Repub 
lic.  She  was  not  doing  this.  She  was  withholding  any  declara 
tion,  on  the  subject.  She  was  holding  on  to  slavery,  in  the  bor 
der  States,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Kentucky  and  Missouri.  She 
was  holding  on  to  the  Southern  States,  and,  apparently,  under 
taking  to  subjugate  them.  The  South  was  asserting  and  ap 
parently  maintaining  that  her  war  was  for  independence,  for 
liberty.  So  that  the  war  was  made  to  appear,  as  one  for  con 
quest,  on  the  part  of  the  North,  and  for  independence,  on  the 
part  of  the  South. 

Sumner  felt  that  all  this  was  wrong,  that  we  could  not  suc 
ceed,  so  long  as  we  allowed  the  South  to  maintain  such  an  atti 
tude.  The  greatest  naval  power  in  the  world  was  Great 
Britain.  She  would  be  against  us  upon  such  an  issue,  as  the 
South  was  making.  For  our  Nation  had  made  war  against 
her,  upon  this  very  issue,  in  our  struggle  for  Independence.  In 
this  quarter,  at  any  rate,  the  feeling  towards  us,  as  a  Nation, 
was  then  none  too  kind.  France,  too,  was  already  committed 
upon  this  question,  for  she  had  aided  us,  in  that  struggle. 
Under  Napoleon,  she  had  since  maintained  a  life  and  death 
struggle,  of  her  own,  upon  this  issue,  first,  when  Napoleon 
emulating  the  Emperor  Charlemagne,  in  the  extent  of  his 
territories,  had  sought  to  unite  all  Western  Europe,  under  the 
battle  cry  of  freedom  from  kings  and  hereditary  monarchs; 
and,  second,  when  all  Europe  had,  in  turn,  united  against  him, 
and  swept  away  his  conquests  and  his  empire,  and  carried  him 
off,  to  St.  Helena.  The  whole  continent  of  Europe  had  seen 
wars  for  conquest,  until  it  was  tired  of  them.  We  could  expect 
no  sympathy  there,  upon  such  an  issue.  Yet  the  South  was 
seeking  assistance  there,  in  its  struggle  for  independence,  as  it 
called  it,  and  the  result  must  be  doubtful  to  us,  if  she  obtained 
such  aid. 

Upon  the  question  of  slavery,  on  the  other  hand,  Europe 
was  with  the  North.  Great  Britain  had  abolished  it,  in  1834. 
France  in  1848;  and  the  example  of  these  nations  was  being 
followed,  all  over  the  Continent.  It  was  everywhere  being 
treated,  as  a  relic  of  barbarism.  Intelligent  men  united  in 
condemning  it  and  among  them,  no  foreign  country  could  hope 
to  find  sympathy,  in  a  war  waged  in  support  of  it- 

Sumner  maintained,  that  our  Nation  should  be  set  right, 
before  the  world.  He  could  not  agree,  that  the  necessity  of 
holding  the  border  States,  for  the  North,  was  a  sufficient  com- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  413 

pensation,  for  the  loss  of  the  goodwill  of  Europe.  Everywhere 
the  real  cause  of  the  War  should  be  proclaimed  and  the  issue 
asserted,  in  no  unmeaning  terms,  that  the  success  of  the  North 
meant  the  destruction  of  slavery ;  while  the  success  of  the  South 
meant  the  establishment  of  a  new  nation,  with  slavery,  as  the 
chief  corner  stone. 

Sumner  early  pressed  this  matter,  upon  the  attention  of 
President  Lincoln.  A  day  or  two  before  the  bombardment  of 
Fort  Sumter,  the  President  told  him  of  the  determination  to 
provision  and  hold  the  fort,  resisting,  by  fire,  an  attempt  to 
take  it,  if  one  was  made  by  the  rebels.  "  Then  the  war  power 
will  be  in  motion,"  answered  Sumner,  "  and  with  it  great 
consequences."  Sumner  was  in  Washington,  in  May,  and  the 
President  invited  him  to  take  an  evening  drive,  in  his  carriage. 
Troops  were  seen  everywhere,  about  the  City,  for  the  purpose 
of  guarding  the  Capitol.  Fortifications  were  being  constructed, 
supplies  were  being  collected  and  everything  suggested  the 
coming  conflict.  Sumner  brought  up  the  subject  of  slavery  and 
took  occasion  to  tell  the  President,  that,  so  far,  he  was  in  the 
right,  in  the  course  he  had  pursued  towards  it,  but  he  must  be 
ready  to  strike,  when  the  time  came. 

A  special  session  of  Congress  was  called  to  meet,  July  4,  1861, 
to. pass  some  measures,  necessary  for  the  war.  Sumner,  prompt 
in  the  discharge  of  his  duty,  was  in  Washington  ten  days,  be 
fore  Congress  opened.  It  continued  in  session,  till  the  middle 
of  August,  doing  a  good  deal  of  actual  work,  but  consuming 
very  little  time,  in  discussion,  the  purpose  being  to  confine 
themselves  closely,  to  the  work  in  hand.  While  it  was  in  session, 
July  21,  occurred  the  battle  of  Bull  Eun.  On  the  day  of  the 
defeat  of  our  army,  Sumner  was  with  the  President  twice,  but 
made  no  mention  of  slavery.  But,  on  the  second  day  after  the 
battle,  he  went  to  the  President,  for  the  express  purpose  of  rec 
ommending  emancipation.  It  was  late  in  the  evening,  and  he 
found  the  President  alone.  Sumner  opened  the  conversation, 
by  saying  he  had  come  to  make  an  important  recommenda 
tion  about  the  conduct  of  the  war.  To  which  the  President 
replied,  that  he  was  just  thinking  of  that,  and  had  something 
new  on  the  subject.  Sumner  supposing  that  he  referred  to 
emancipation,  said :  "  Then  you  are  going  against  slavery !  " 
But  the  President  replied,  "  Oh,  no,  not  that."  Sumner  an 
swered,  he  was  sorry.  When  the  President  called  his  atten 
tion  to  the  conversation,  on  their  ride  together,  in  May,  and 
asked  Sumner,  if  he  remembered  it.  "  Certainly,"  said  Sumner. 
"  Did  you  not  then  say  that  you  approved  my  course  ?  "  asked 
the  President  "  Certainly,"  said  Sumner,  "  but  I  also  said 


414  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

that  you  must  be  ready  to  strike  at  slavery,  and  now  the  mo 
ment  has  come."  But  the  President  did  not  agree  with  him. 
Sumner  urged  his  reasons,  upon  the  President,  and  their  con 
versation  continued,  until  midnight ;  but  he  was  unable  to  con 
vince  him.  Lincoln's  primary  object  was  to  save  the  Union; 
Sumner's  to  destroy  slavery. 

Sumner  was  impatient  at  the  delay  and  resolved  to  go  before 
the  people  and  publicly  urge  the  necessity  and  duty  of  emanci 
pation  and  create  a  sentiment,  in  its  favor.  During  the  fall, 
he  was  invited,  by  William  Claflin,  the  Chairman  of  the 
Massachusetts  State  Eepublican  Committee,  to  address  the 
State  Convention,  which  was  to  meet  at  Worcester,  on  Octo 
ber  first.  Sumner  replied,  that  he  would  not  speak,  except  to 
urge  the  duty  of  immediate  emancipation.  Claflin  urged  him 
to  speak,  and  on  that  subject,  if  he  chose.  Sumner  prepared 
his  speech,  and  at  a  subsequent  call  of  Claflin,  read  to  him  a 
sketch  of  what  he  proposed  to  say,  telling  him  that,  if  it  did  not 
meet  his  entire  approval,  to  say  so,  and  he  would  not  appear; 
but  that  he  would  say  this,  if  he  spoke  at  all.  Claflin  expressed 
his  entire  agreement  and  Sumner  spoke.  He  was  received  by 
the  Convention,  with  great  enthusiasm  and  spoke  for  about 
an  hour.  This  explanation  is  proper,  because,  in  the  heat  of 
opposition,  raised  by  the  speech,  it  was  claimed  that  he  had 
thrust  himself  and  his  subject  upon  the  Convention  and  that 
what  he  said  was  not  favorably  received. 

He  said  he  had  often  appeared  before  the  people,  to  urge  the 
duty  of  emancipating  the  National  Government,  from  the  con 
trol  of  slavery,  and,  that  this  had  now  been  accomplished,  first, 
by  the  people  in  the  election  of  Lincoln  and,  second,  by  the  cart 
ridge  box,  when,  in  obedience  to  the  command  of  the  Presi 
dent,  Fort  Sumter  had  refused  to  surrender  and  had  re 
turned  the  fire  of  the  rebel  artillery.  It  had  often  been  said 
that  the  war  would  make  an  end  of  slavery,  but  it  was  surer 
still,  that  the  overthrow  of  slavery  would  make  an  end  of  the 
war.  The  war  must  be  brought  to  bear  directly  on  slavery. 
When  the  slaves  fled  to  our  armies,  they  must  be  received  as 
free.  The  higher  law,  under  the  Constitution,  martial  law, 
which  is  only  a  form  of  self-defence,  should  be  invoked  against 
slavery.  Under  this  law,  not  only  the  President,  but  the  Com 
mander  of  the  army,  had  power  to  order  the  emancipation  of 
the  slaves. 

"  Two  objects  are  before  us,  Union  and  Peace/'  he  said, te  each 
for  the  sake  of  the  other,  and  both  for  the  sake  of  the  country ; 
but  without  Emancipation  how  can  we  expect  either  ?  " 

"  Fellow-citizens,  I  have  spoken  frankly ;  for  such  is  always 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  415 

my  habit.  Never  was  there  greater  need  of  frankness.  Let 
patriots  understand  each  other  and  they  cannot  differ  widely. 
All  will  unite  in  whatever  is  required  by  the  sovereign  exigen 
cies  of  self-defence;  which  means  that  all  will  unite  in  sus 
taining  the  National  Government,  and  driving  back  the  Rebels. 
But  this  cannot  be  by  any  half  way  measure,  or  lukewarm 
policy.  There  must  be  no  hesitation.  Hearken  not  to  the 
voice  of  Slavery,  no  matter  what  its  tone  of  persuasion.  It 
is  the  gigantic  Traitor  and  Parricide, — not  for  a  moment  to  be 
trusted.  Believe  me  its  friendship  is  more  deadly  than  its 
enmity.  If  you  are  wise,  prudent,  economical,  conservative, 
practical,  you  will  strike  quick  and  hard, — strike,  too,  where 
the  blow  will  be  most  felt — strike  at  the  mainspring  of  the 
Rebellion." 

The  address  was  received  with  frequent  and  long  applause, — 
sometimes  so  great  that  the  speaker  was  compelled  to  stop  and 
wait,  till  quiet  had  been  restored.  No  sign  of  dissent  was 
shown  during  the  delivery.  But  the  applause  must  have 
come  from  those,  in  the  Convention,  who  had  been  Free- 
soilers.  The  conservative  or  Whig  element,  in  the  Convention, 
though  they  made  no  sign  of  disapproval,  during  the  speech, 
were  against  Sumner's  recommendation.  A  resolution  was 
introduced  by  James  Freeman  Clarke,  proposing  that  all  slaves, 
within  the  lines  of  our  armies,  be  declared  free  and  that  their 
services  be  accepted,  for  the  Union,  and  further,  expressing 
the  opinion,  that  slavery  was  the  cause  of  the  war  and  asking 
the  Government  to  remove  it.  The  resolution  was  laid  upon 
the  table,  pending  the  transaction  of  other  business,  but,  when 
a  motion  was  made  to  take  it  from  the  table,  another  motion, 
to  adjourn,  was  made  and  carried.  And  so  the  Convention 
adjourned,  without  a  direct  expression,  on  the  resolution,  being 
taken,  but,  with  an  indirect  expression  given,  against  it. 

Out  of  the  Convention,  the  speech  created  a  good  deal  of  a 
sensation.  It  was  the  first  declaration,  by  any  one,  in  high 
authority,  in  favor  of  emancipation.  True  some  of  the  extreme 
anti-slavery  men  had  advocated  it,  but  they  had  advocated  a 
great  many  extravagant  things;  and  sometimes  their  advocacy 
did  not  attract  much  attention.  But  it  did  attract  attention 
when  Sumner,  openly  and  with  earnestness  advocated  it,  be 
fore  a  political  convention,  of  his  own  State.  The  speech  was 
printed  in  the  newspapers  and  was  read  widely  and  evoked 
much  comment.  The  press  of  Boston,  including  the  Repub 
lican  papers,  all  condemned  it,  as  did  the  Springfield  Repub 
lican.  Indeed,  never  once,  in  his  career,  did  Sumner  receive 
the  cordial  support  of  the  newspapers  of  his  home  city.  The 


416  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

tone  of  their  comment  on  this  occasion  was  in  some  instances 
unkind.  One  of  them  called  him  "  one  of  the  most  irrepressible 
impracticables  of  the  party,"  and  added  that  "  it  is  the  position 
and  antecedents  of  the  Senator  which  alone  shield  him  from 
the  suspicion  of  being  a  proper  person  against  whom  a  writ 
De  lunatico  inquirendo  might  be  issued."  Another  called  it  an 
"  unfortunate  speech,  which  had  certainly  done  as  much  as 
lay  within  the  compass  of  one  man's  powers  to  inspire  this  sus 
picion  (that  the  abolition  of  slavery  and  not  the  Union  was  the 
object  of  the  war,)  to  distract  and  weaken  the  loyal  and  by  in 
direction  to  aid  the  disloyal."  While  the  Boston  Post  (Demo 
cratic)  in  commenting  on  it,  said  "  such  men  as  Sumner,  and 
his  ilk,  do  not  fight  nor  pay;  they  only  brawl,  and  deserve  to 
be  treated  as  were  old  scolds  in  days  past, — ducked  in  a  horse 
pond,"  calling  it  again  "  the  rodomontade  of  this  classic  fana 
tic  at  the  Worcester  Convention."  But  outside  of  Boston, 
the  Republican  papers  of  Massachusetts  generally  approved  the 
speech.  The  New  York  papers  as  well  as  the  Pennsylvania  ones 
were  generally  divided,  according  to  politics,  upon  it.  It  was 
printed  and  commented  on  variously  in  England  and  France. 
His  friends  were  as  enthusiastic  as  his  critics  were  bitter. 
The  former  took  up  the  matter  and  to  the  threats  of  the  latter 
that  they  would  defeat  his  return  to  the  Senate,  at  his  next  elec 
tion,  they  predicted  that  his  next  election  would  be  as  nearly 
unanimous  as  the  last.  They  thanked  the  papers  that  had 
assailed  him,  as  simply  revealing,  in  advance,  their  anxiety, 
for  his  retirement,  and  promised  their  own  support.  But  this 
was  hardly  necessary;  for  within  a  year,  the  whole  party  were 
compelled,  by  the  logic  of  events,  to  the  same  position,  he  had 
taken.  The  quotation,  from  Shakespeare's  King  Henry  V, 
with  which  he  prefaced  this  speech,  was  rising  up,  in  warning, 
to  the  South. 

"  Therefore  take  heed  *  *  *  " 
How  you  awake  the  sleeping  sword  of  war  : 
We  charge  you,  in  the  name  of  God,  take  heed !  " 

From  this  time  forward,  Sumner  lost  no  opportunity  to  urge 
emancipation,  whether  before  the  people,  or  in  his  place  in  the 
Senate,  or  with  the  President.  He  knew  that  the  great  pur 
pose  must  be  to  convince  the  people.  He  never  lost  his  faith, 
in  them.  If  they  once  united,  with  him,  the  result  was  cer 
tain;  but,  without  them,  it  was  doubtful,  when  success  would 
come.  To  this  task  therefore  he  addressed  himself,  during  the 
remainder  of  the  recess,  of  Congress. 

He  grasped  the  opportunity  for  the  accomplishment  of  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  417 

great  purpose  of  his  life,  and  resolutely  pushed  forward  to 
success.  He  was  not  in  politics  for  the  sake  of  its  honors  and 
its  pleasures.  He  had  no  thought  of  wasting  his  life  there, 
enjoying  the  idle  days.  He  had  a  distinct  purpose,  which  it 
was  the  hope  of  his  life  to  see  accomplished,  for  the  good  of 
his  country;  and  he  kept  steadily  on,  in  pursuit  of  it.  This  is 
what  distinguishes  him  from  so  many  statesmen,  bent  only  on 
the  attainment  of  place  and  power  for  themselves.  The  conse 
quences  to  himself,  Sumner  did  not  stop  to  estimate.  With  un 
failing  confidence  in  the  justice  of  his  cause,  if  he  could  only 
accomplish  it,  he  was  willing  to  rest  his  fame.  And  yet  the 
people  recognized  his  loftiness  of  purpose,  as  they  always  will, 
when  real  merit  is  at  stake,  and  loyally  kept  him  at  his  post. 
Daring  always  to  do  right,  the  sequel  showed  he  was  safe. 

To  John  Bright,  the  English  statesman,  he  wrote:  :(  The 
contest  must  go  on:  there  is  no  thought  of  compromise  or  ar 
rangement.  And  with  its  progress  the  slavery  question  becomes 
more  prominent.  Against  war  as  I  am,  never  could  I  wage 
a  war  for  emancipation ;  but  with  war  forced  upon  us  I  accept 
emancipation  as  one  of  the  agencies  by  which  it  may  be  brought 
to  a  close,  and  I  see  clearly  that  the  war  will  then  have  a  charac 
ter  which  it  now  wants.  If  there  are  difficulties  in  this  step, 
there  are  greater  difficulties  without  it."  And  again:  "The 
South  will  fight  like  desperadoes,  and  I  see  no  chance  of  clos 
ing  the  war  without  striking  at  slavery.  *  *  *  Meanwhile  the 
good  people  of  England  owe  to  us  their  good  wishes.  We  are 
fighting  the  battle  of  civilization  and  their  public  men  and 
newspapers  should  recognize  and  declare  the  true  character  of 
the  conflict." 

Within  three  weeks  after  the  Worcester  Convention,  where 
he  proposed  emancipation  as  a  remedy  for  the  hour,  he  pre 
pared  a  lecture  on  the  Rebellion,  its  Origin  and  Mainspring. 
In  this  lecture  he  treated  the  history  of  the  South  in  its  rela 
tion  to  the  General  Government,  how  it  had  haltingly  con 
curred  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and  again  in  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution,  how  it  had  by  threatening  disun 
ion  gradually  acquired  and  maintained  for  Slavery  the  suprem 
acy  and  with  what  tyranny  it  had  commanded  obedience,  how 
now  by  a  lawful  and  constitutional  triumph  of  Freedom,  in  the 
election  of  Lincoln,  being  deprived  of  its  accustomed  rule,  it 
had  raised  the  bloody  hand  of  Rebellion  and  proposed  by  war 
to  destroy  the  Republic. 

"  But  all  must  see,"  he  said, — "  and  nobody  will  deny — that 
Slavery  is  the  ruling  idea  of  this  Rebellion.  It  is  Slavery  that 
marshals  these  hosts  and  breathes  into  their  embattled  ranks 


418  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

its  own  barbarous  fire.  It  is  Slavery  that  stamps  its  character 
alike  upon  officers  and  men.  It  is  Slavery  that  inspires  all 
from  the  General  to  the  trumpeter.  It  is  Slavery  that  speaks 
in  the  word  of  command,  and  sounds  in  the  morning  drum 
beat.  It  is  Slavery  that  digs  trenches  and  builds  hostile  forts. 
It  is  Slavery  that  pitches  its  wicked  tents  and  stations  its  sen 
tries  over  against  the  national  capitol.  It  is  Slavery  that 
sharpens  the  bayonet  and  runs  the  bullet, — that  points  the 
cannon  and  scatters  the  shell,  blazing,  bursting  with  death. 
Wherever  this  Rebellion  shows  itself,  whatever  form  it  takes, 
whatever  thing  it  does,  whatever  it  meditates,  it  is  moved  by 
Slavery;  nay,  the  Rebellion  is  Slavery  itself,  incarnate,  living, 
acting,  raging,  robbing,  murdering  according  to  the  essential 
law  of  its  being-" 

"  Such,"  he  added,  "  is  Slavery,  that  it  cannot  exist,  unless 
it  owns  the  Government.  *  *  *  The  slave-masters  of  our 
country  saw  that  they  were  dislodged  from  the  National  Govern 
ment,  and  straightway  they  rebelled.  The  Republic,  which  they 
could  no  longer  rule,  they  determined  to  ruin.  And  now  the 
issue  is  joined.  Slavery  must  either  rule  or  die." 

He  argued  that  the  Union  could  be  preserved  only  by  the 
destruction  of  Slavery.  He  urged  the  people  to  strike  where 
the  blow  would  be  felt  and  not  miss  the  precious  opportunity 
of  destroying  the  monster  evil,  the  source  of  all  this  strife,  that 
military  necessity  required  this  in  just  self-defence.  He  knew 
the  cavils  that  were  urged  against  this  remedy,  but  he  trusted 
the  people;  for  the  heart  of  the  people  was  right.  He  urged 
them  to  be  aroused  to  the  occasion.  The  only  peril  he  feared 
was  some  new  concession  to  Slavery. 

This  address  was  delivered  in  Boston,  first,  and  then,  in 
several  cities  of  Massachusetts,  as  well  as  in  Providence,  Al 
bany  and  Philadelphia,  always  to  full  houses.  Such  was  its 
popularity,  that  he  was  asked  to  repeat  it,  in  Boston  and  Phil 
adelphia;  and  he  did  repeat  it  in  the  former  place.  It  was 
last  delivered  in  Cooper  Institute,  New  York,  on  November 
twenty-seventh.  The  demand  for  it  showed  the  interest  of 
the  plain  people,  in  what  he  had  to  say,  and  the  conversion  of 
the  masses  to  his  opinions. 

The  audience,  in  New  York,  was  a  brilliant  one.  Long  before 
the  hour  for  meeting,  the  immense  hall  was  crowded.  The 
evening  was  a  stormy  one,  and  still  the  number  of  ladies  pres 
ent  was  larger  than  ever  before  seen,  in  the  city,  on  a  similar 
occasion.  Many  distinguished  men  of  New  York  and  New 
Jersey  occupied  seats  upon  the  platform.  The  New  York 
Herald,  though  hostile  in  politics,  and  unfriendly  to  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  419 

meeting,  admitted,  that  never  before  had  Cooper  Institute  held 
an  audience  of  such  general  reputation  and  intelligence. 
When  Sumner  came  forward  he  was  met,  by  tumultuous  ap 
plause  and  cheers  and  waving  of  hats  and  handkerchiefs,  and 
it  was  several  minutes,  before  he  could  proceed,  for  the  enthu 
siasm,  which  his  appearance  excited.  Frequently  during  the 
delivery  of  his  lecture,  he  was  similarly  interrupted  and  at  its 
close  resolutions  were  adopted,  declaring  it  to  be  the  judg 
ment  of  the  meeting  that  the  public  sentiment  of  the  North 
was,  in  full  sympathy  with  any  practical  scheme  for  the  extir 
pation  of  Slavery,  and  would  accept  that  as  the  only  consistent 
issue,  in  the  contest  then  waged.  They  also  conveyed  to  Sumner 
the  thanks  of  the  meeting,  for  his  eloquent  assertion  of  this 
principle.  Thus  what  had  been  denied  him,  in  Massachusetts, 
was,  six  weeks  later,  accorded  him,  in  New  York. 

At  the  opening  of  Congress  Sumner  renewed  his  efforts  for 
emancipation  in  the  Senate.  The  regular  session  commenced 
December  second,  1861.  Two  days  later,  Sumner  introduced 
in  the  Senate,  a  resolution  that  the  Secretary  of  War  be  re 
quested  to  furnish,  to  the  Senate,  copies  of  any  general  or 
ders,  in  the  Military  Department  of  Missouri,  relating  to  fugi 
tive  slaves.  General  Halleck,  in  command  of  that  department, 
had  issued  an  order  directing  that  such  persons  should  not  be 
received,  within  his  camps,  or  in  the  lines  of  his  forces,  when 
on  the  march,  and,  that  any  such  slaves  when  found  there  be 
driven  out  of  the  lines.  Sumner  spoke  on  the  resolution  and 
characterized  the  order,  as  irrational  and  inhuman,  authorizing 
the  surrender  of  slaves,  beyond  any  constitutional  obligation. 
He  insisted  that  such  an  order  was  disheartening,  to  the  soldiers, 
and  discreditable  to  the  country,  both  at  home  and  abroad. 

On  December  seventeenth,  he  followed  this,  with  another 
resolution,  that  the  Committee  on  Military  affairs,  of  which  his 
colleague,  Wilson,  was  Chairman,  be  directed  to  consider  the 
expediency  of  providing  by  additional  legislation,  that  the  Na 
tional  army  be  not  employed,  in  the  surrender  of  fugitive 
slaves.  It  appeared  that  General  Stone  who  commanded  the 
Union  troops,  at  the  disaster  of  Ball's  Bluff,  had  required  his 
men  to  surrender  fugitive  slaves.  In  his  command,  were 
troops  from  Massachusetts,  who  had  complained  of  this  re 
quirement.  Governor  Andrew  had  requested  Sumner  to  call 
attention  of  the  War  Department  to  it  and  ask  that  the  out 
rage  be  remedied.  Some  German  troops,  who  had  enlisted 
in  Massachusetts,  were  also  in  Stone's  army  and  were  like 
wise  remonstrating. 

Evidence  that  the  country  was  being  aroused  upon  these  ques- 


420  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

tions  came  to  Sumner,  from  various  sources.  On  the  day 
after  the  introduction  of  the  first  resolution,  a  letter  from 
St.  Louis  informed  Sumner,  that  the  very  slaves  given  up,  be 
longed  to  Secessionists,  in  the  Confederate  army,  and  asked 
if  it  was  not  inhuman,  for  these  poor  people  to  be  made  out 
laws,  for  no  crime,  save  that  they  refused  to  join  their  masters, 
in  the  onslaught  on  the  Government.  Another  writer  from 
Missouri,  in  a  letter  which  Sumner  read  to  the  Senate,  when  he 
offered  the  second  resolution,  said,  that  he  had  lived  in  Mis 
souri  twenty-four  years  and  knew  her  people  and  had  served 
them,  in  various  offices,  and  that  it  was  nonsense,  to  try  to  save 
Missouri  to  the  Union  and  the  institution  of  slavery  also,  that 
slavery  should  fall  and  Missouri  be  saved,  that  if  the  National 
armies  would  proclaim  freedom  to  the  slaves  of  Secessionists, 
the  war  would  soon  close. 

In  accordance  with  his  second  resolution,  a  bill  was  reported 
by  Senator  Wilson's  committee,  but  it  gave  way  to  another, 
from  the  House,  prohibiting  the  employment  of  National  troops, 
in  the  surrender  of  fugitive  slaves.  On  March  thirteenth, 
1862,  this  became  a  law.  It  was  one  step  towards  Sumner's 
desired  goal, — emancipation. 

Sumner's  outspoken  advocacy  of  this  measure,  was  often 
criticised,  and  sometimes,  for  peculiar  reasons.  Certain  it  is 
that  whenever  an  opportunity  presented  to  correct  the  attitude 
of  the  country,  and  to  further  his  cherished  object,  he  did  not 
fail  to  embrace  it.  Two  of  his  colleagues,  in  the  Senate,  had 
died,  Bingham  of  Michigan  and  Baker  of  Oregon.  Sumner 
took  the  opportunity,  in  commemorating  both,  to  especially  em 
phasize  their  work  against  slavery  and  their  stand  for  emanci 
pation.  He  said  that  except  while  engaged  in  the  public  serv 
ice,  Bingham  had  all  his  life  been  a  farmer.  By  successive 
promotions,  he  had  been  advanced  to  the  State  Legislature, 
Speaker  of  that  body,  Member  of  Congress,  Governor  of  his 
State,  and  then  Senator.  But  he  belonged  primarily  to  the  vo 
cation  of  the  farmer,  that  does  so  much  to  strengthen  both  body 
and  soul.  Dependent  upon  Nature,  the  sun  and  the  rain,  the 
ever  varying  seasons,  he  had  learned  to  be  independent  of  men. 
Though  a  Democrat,  when  he  came  to  Washington,  he  had 
frankly  accepted  the  situation  and  true  to  his  instincts  for  free 
dom  had  assumed  the  responsibilities  of  his  position  and  had 
voted  for  the  Wilmot  proviso,  forbidding  slavery  in  any  part  of 
the  territory  proposed  to  be  acquired  from  Mexico,  at  the  close 
of  the  Mexican  War,  and,  afterwards,  had  opposed  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Bill.  All  this,  Sumner  recorded  to  his  credit,  and  he 
added : 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  421 

"  He  set  his  face  against  concession,  in  any  degree,  and  in 
every  form.  The  time  had  come  when  slavery  was  to  be  met, 
and  he  was  ready.  As  the  Eebellion  assumed  its  warlike  pro 
portions,  his  perception  of  our  duties  was  none  the  less  clear. 
In  his  mind,  slavery  was  not  only  the  origin,  but  vital  part  of 
the  Eebellion,  and  therefore  to  be  attacked.  Slavery  was  also 
the  mainspring  of  the  belligerent  power  now  arrayed  against 
the  Union, — therefore  in  the  name  of  the  Union,  to  be  de 
stroyed.  *  *  *  Such  a  Senator  can  ill  be  spared  at  this  hour. 
His  cheerful  confidence,  his  genuine  courage,  his  practical  in 
stinct,  his  simple  presence,  would  help  the  great  events  now 
preparing,  nay,  which  are  at  hand.  Happily  he  survives  in  a 
noble  example,  and  speaks  even  from  the  tomb." 

He  said  that  Baker's  career  had  been  somewhat  different.  He 
was  born,  in  England,  of  poor  parents,  and  his  earliest  recol 
lection  was  of  the  magnificent  pageant,  attending  the  funeral 
of  Lord  Nelson,  wounded  in  the  naval  battle  of  Trafalgar, 
where  his  own,  annihilated  the  French  fleet,  he  dying  three 
hours  later,  when  the  day  was  won.  Thus  was  Baker  early 
taught  love  of  country.  He  was  brought,  as  a  child,  to  Phila 
delphia.  While  still  a  boy,  he  had  worked,  in  the  factories,  at 
the  loom,  and  later  had  removed  to  Illinois.  His  early  career 
was  one  of  struggle,  with  adversity,  but  having  reached  the  bar, 
his  engaging  ways  and  rare  endowments  as  an  orator  had  quickly 
carried  him  into  Congress.  Later  he  commanded  a  regiment 
with  signal  ability,  in  the  Mexican  War.  Disappointed  at  not 
receiving  a  seat  in  the  Cabinet  of  General  Taylor,  and  consider 
ing  his  political  career  closed,  in  Illinois,  he  had  hurried  with 
the  tide  of  emigration,  to  the  Pacific  coast,  where  his  ability,  as 
an  orator,  was  quickly  recognized  and,  a  little  later,  he  reap 
peared  in  Washington,  as  a  Senator  from  Oregon.  In  a  funeral 
oration  over  Broderick,  Senator  from  California,  killed  by  Terry 
the  Chief  Justice  of  that  State,  in  a  duel,  growing  out  of  politi 
cal  discussions,  over  slavery,  in  the  heated  campaign  of  1859, 
Baker  had  so  wrought  up  the  feelings  of  his  audience  that 
violence  was  feared.  On  the  breaking  out  of  the  Rebellion,  he 
had  enlisted  in  the  army  and  was  made  Colonel  of  his  regiment 
and,  being  stationed  near  Washington,  he  had  sustained  the 
dual  relation  of  Soldier  and  Senator. 

Coming  into  the  Senate  one  day,  in  the  full  uniform  of  a 
Colonel,  he  had  laid  his  sword  upon  his  desk,  and  sat  listening 
to  John  C.  Breckenridge,  lately  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
President,  opposing  the  measures  of  the  Government,  for  the 
preservation  of  the  Union.  Baker  at  once  replied  and  the  pas 
sions  of  his  impulsive  nature  being  aroused,  branding  his  ad- 


422  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

versary's  words  as  "  polished  treason  even  in  the  very  Capitol 
of  the  Republic/'  infusing  the  fire  of  his  own  spirit  into  his 
audience,  he  created  a  scene  never  to  be  forgotten. 

*  What  would  have  been  thought/'-  he  demanded,  "  if  in 
another  Capitol,  in  a  yet  more  martial  age,  a  Senator,  with  the 
Roman  purple  flowing  from  his  shoulders,  had  risen  in  his 
place,  surrounded  by  all  the  illustrations  of  Roman  glory,  and 
declared  that  advancing  Hannibal  was  just,  and  that  Carthage 
should  be  dealt  with  on  terms  of  peace?  What  would  have 
been  thought,  if  after  the  battle  of  Cannae,  a  Senator  had  de 
nounced  every  levy  of  the  Roman  people,  every  expenditure  of 
its  treasure,  every  appeal  to  the  old  recollections  and  the  old 
glories  ?  "  "  He  would  have  been  hurled  from  the  Tarpeian 
Rock,"  interrupted  Fessenden,  in  an  undertone,  who  sat  near 
him.  And  Baker  catching  up  the  answer  and  turning  it  against 
his  adversary,  thundered  on,  in  his  indictment  of  Breckenridge. 

Breckenridge  had  not  caught  the  voice  of  Fessenden  and, 
thinking  it  was  Sumner  who  had  suggested  the  Tarpeian  Rock, 
in  his  reply,  made  a  coarse  onslaught  on  Sumner.  Sumner 
looked  surprised  but,  accustomed  to  the  abuse  of  the  South, 
said  nothing. 

Breckenridge  and  Baker  had  come  to  the  parting  of  the  ways. 
The  brilliant  Southerner  of  long  and  distinguished  ancestry,  in 
Kentucky,  was  expelled  from  the  Senate  at  its  next  session, 
characterized,  in  the  resolution  of  expulsion,  by  Baker's  epithet, 
"John  C.  Breckenridge,  the  traitor,"  and  destined  never  to 
reappear,  in  his  country's  service.  But  his  more  brilliant  an 
tagonist,  Baker,  the  poor  boy,  continued  with  increasing  loyalty, 
in  the  service  of  his  adopted  country.  At  the  head  of  his 
brigade,  at  Ball's  Bluff,  he  fell  dead,  pierced  by  nine  balls,  the 
brain  that  had  swayed  listening  multitudes  shattered  and  the 
bosom,  that  had  beat  to  so  many  generous  impulses,  riddled. 
His  eulogies  were  pronounced  in  the  Senate,  in  the  presence  of 
the  Chief  Magistrate  and  his  Secretaries,  and  a  multitude, 
gathered  to  pay  him  honor,  at  the  very  session  of  Congress  that 
his  antagonist  was  expelled. 

It  was  an  occasion  that  appealed  strongly  to  Sumner ;  and, 
always  happy,  in  tributes  to  his  deceased  colleagues,  he  was  then 
at  his  best.  The  encounter  at  Ball's  Bluff  was  a  signal  disaster, 
to  our  arms,  and  there  was  a  strong  disposition,  to  hold  some 
one  responsible  for  it.  The  brilliant  life,  suddenly  snatched 
away  in  the  midst  of  an  honorable  career,  in  the  place  where 
the  waves  of  excitement  ran  highest,  over  a  question  that  was 
rending  the  nation,  aroused  intense  feeling  and  called  out  bit 
ter  expressions.  But,  through  it  all,  Sumner  saw  the  evil,  that 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  493 

caused  it  and  the  remedy.  Grief  would  be  unavailing,  he 
thought,  that  did  not  point  them  out.  Therefore,  after  pictur 
ing  these  leading  events,  in  Baker's  eventful  life,  he  pointed 
the  whole  lesson,  with  this  significant  plea  for  emancipation. 

"  But  the  question  is  painfully  asked,  Who  was  author  of 
this  tragedy,  now  filling  the  Senate  Chamber,  as  already  it  has 
filled  the  country,  with  mourning?  There  is  a  strong  desire  to 
hold  some  body  responsible,  where  so  many  perished,  so  un- 
profitably.  But  we  need  not  appoint  committees,  or  study  testi 
mony,  to  know  precisely  who  took  this  precious  life.  That  great 
criminal  is  easily  detected, — still  erect  and  defiant,  without 
concealment  or  disguise.  The  guns,  the  balls  and  the  men  that 
fired  them  are  of  little  importance.  It  is  the  power  behind  all, 
saying,  'The  State,  it  is  I,'  that  took  this  precious  life;  and 
this  power  is  Slavery.  The  nine  balls  that  slew  our  departed 
brother  came  from  Slavery.  Every  gaping  wound  of  his  slashed 
bosom  testifies  against  Slavery.  Every  drop  of  his  generous 
blood  cries  out  from  the  ground  against  Slavery.  The  brain  so 
rudely  shattered  has  its  own  voice  and  the  tongue,  so  suddenly 
silenced  in  death  speaks  now,  in  more  than  living  eloquence. 
To  hold  others  responsible,  is  to  hold  the  dwarf  agent  and  dis 
miss  the  giant  principal.  Nor  shall  we  do  great  service,  if 
merely  criticising  some  local  blunder,  we  leave  untouched  that 
fatal  forbearance  through  which  the  weakness  of  the  Rebellion 
is  changed  into  strength,  and  the  strength  of  our  armies  is 
changed  into  weakness." 

"  May  our  grief  to-day  be  no  hollow  pageant,  nor  expend 
itself  in  this  funeral  pomp !  It  must  become  a  motive  and  im 
pulse  to  patriot  action.  But  patriotism  itself,  that  command 
ing  charity,  embracing  so  many  other  charities,  is  only  a  name, 
and  nothing  else,  unless  we  resolve  calmly,  plainly,  solemnly, 
that  Slavery,  the  barbarous  enemy  of  our  country,  the  irreconcil 
able  foe  of  our  Union,  the  violator  of  our  Constitution,  the  dis 
turber  of  our  peace,  the  vampire  of  our  national  life,  sucking  its 
best  blood,  the  assassin  of  our  children  and  the  murderer  of  our 
dead  Senator,  shall  be  struck  down." 

These  tributes  of  Sumner  to  his  dead  colleagues  were  crit 
icised  at  the  time  for  the  passages  I  have  quoted.  One  news 
paper  of  New  York,  in  an  abusive  article,  declared  that,  "  Even 
in  the-  burial  services  of  the  dead  he  mingles  his  sectional  hate 
and  personal  wrath  "  and  that  he  ought  to  be  sent  home  to 
Boston  to  be  imprisoned  in  Fort  Warren  with  Mason  and  Sli- 
dell,  all  enemies  alike  of  the  Government  and  the  Union.  But 
Sumner  thought  otherwise.  "  It  is  my  nature,"  he  once  said, 
"  to  be  more  touched,  by  the  kindness  of  friends,  than  by  the 


424  LIFE  °F  CHARLES  &UMNER 

malignity  of  enemies;  and  I  know  something  of  both."  He 
knew  his  dead  colleagues,  Bingham  and  Baker,  and  the  les 
son  of  their  lives  and  its  value  to  their  country,  at  this  time. 
He  could  justify  all  he  had  said  of  them  and  these  Congres 
sional  eulogies  published  in  pamphlet  form  were  sent  broadcast 
over  the  country  and  were  eagerly  read  by  patriotic  people. 

Such  work  for  emancipation  was  making  itself  felt,  in 
the  country.  During  the  early  years  of  the  war,  there  was  an 
effort  made  by  the  Government  to  keep  the  border  States  from 
joining  the  Rebellion.  They  were  slave  states  and  it  was  feared 
that  the  adoption  of  radical  anti-slavery  measures  would  drive 
them  out  of  the  Union.  President  Lincoln,  feeling  the  re 
sponsibility  of  his  position,  and  knowing  that  his  administra- 
ton  was  new  and  untried,  and  that  it  had  been  entered  upon 
under  circumstances  of  peculiar  difficulty,  was  anxious  to  gain 
the  confidence  of  the  country  and  to  keep  these  border  States. 
There  could  be  no  doubt  that  he  felt,  as  to  the  cause  of  the  war, 
much  as  Sumner  did.  Three  years  before,  in  his  debate  with 
Douglas,  he  had  declared,  "  I  believe  this  Government  cannot 
endure  permanently,  half  slave  and  half  free/'  And  he  had 
then  made  the  prediction  that  it  would  eventually  become  "  all 
one  thing  or  all  the  other."  He  had  never  retracted  these 
opinions,  then  deliberately  expressed.  But  his  position  was 
different  from  Sumner's,  who  had  been  in  the  Senate  for  ten 
years,  and  was  well-known  in  public  life;  and  his  habits  of 
thought  were  essentially  different.  He  watched  the  public  pulse 
more  carefully;  he  reasoned  out  his  conclusions  more  cau 
tiously.  Pie  was  slow  in  reaching  his  conclusions;  and  he  had 
to  reach  them  himself,  no  one  could  be  said  to  control  him. 
But  his  conclusions,  when  reached,  were  safe.  Sumner  while 
chafing  at  the  delay  of  emancipation,  knew  him  and  trusted 
him  always.  And,  to  the  credit  of  both,  it  may  be  said,  no 
other  President,  during  Summer's  whole  public  career,  so  much 
appreciated  and  trusted  him  as  Lincoln. 

Lincoln  heard  Sumner's  plea  for  emancipation  patiently  and 
considered  his  arguments,  but  was  slow  to  express  himself,  not 
agreeing  that  the  time  was  ripe  or  that  the  people  were  pre 
pared  for  it.  But  before  the  end  of  December,  1861,  Lincoln 
privately  confessed  to  Sumner  that  he  was  ahead  of  him  only  a 
month  or  six  weeks.  A  majority  of  his  cabinet  then  favored 
emancipation.  The  change  was  beginning  to  show  itself,  in 
the  army  orders,  and  a  different  attitude,  towards  fugitive 
slaves,  who  reached  the  Union  ranks.  The  time  was  ripening 
fast  for  the  consummation,  so  long  hoped  for,  by  Sumner.  But 
it  was  not  destined  to  be  reached  in  six  weeks. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

THE    TRENT   AFFAIR — SUMNER   URGES    RELEASE    OF    MASON    AND 

SLIDELL HIS   SPEECH HIS  APPEARANCE  AND  POSITION 

EMANCIPATION,     ADVOCATED     BY     SUMNER OTHER     QUES 
TIONS 

THE  ports  of  the  South  were  now  in  a  state  of  blockade  and 
the  National  Government  was  making  every  effort  to  cut  off  the 
Confederacy  from  communication  with  the  world.  At  the  same 
time  the  South  was  bending  every  energy  to  maintain  her  as 
serted  position  as  an  independent  nation.  She  had  appointed 
James  M.  Mason,  of  Virginia,  Commissioner  and  Envoy  to  Eng 
land,  and  John  Slidell,  of  Louisiana,  in  the  same  capacity  to 
France.  They  had  succeeded  in  running  the  blockade,  some 
time  in  October,  1861,  and  had  reached  Havana,  in  Cuba,  with 
their  two  secretaries,  their  baggage  and  dispatches.  It  became 
generally  known  that  they  were  in  Havana,  and  what  their  mis 
sion  was.  They  were  to  act  as  agents  of  the  Confederate  gov 
ernment,  in  procuring  loans  of  money  and  armed  intervention, 
as  well  as  the  recognition  of  the  Confederacy  and,  generally, 
obstruct  the  United  States,  in  their  dealings  with  those  powers. 
Having  reached  Havana,  they  were  anxious  to  proceed  on  their 
missions,  but  the  National  Government  was  equally  anxious  to 
prevent  them.  They  were  still  far  from  their  accredited  gov 
ernments,  but  they  relied  on  the  vessels  of  some  neutral  power, 
to  carry  them.  They  had  taken  passage,  in  the  English  mail 
and  passenger  vessel  Trent,  on  their  way  to  St.  Thomas,  where 
that  vessel  turned  her  passengers  over  to  a  transatlantic  ship. 
While  near  Nassau,  on  November  eighth,  but  on  the  open  sea, 
their  vessel,  the  Trent,  was  overhauled  by  the  San  Jacinto, 
commanded  by  Captain  Wilkes.  He  acted  without  instructions. 
The  Trent  was  searched  and  Mason  and  Slidell,  with  their 
secretaries  were  transferred  to  the  United  States  vessel  and 
carried  into  Boston  harbor,  where  they  were  confined  in  Fort 
Warren. 

The  affair  excited  various  comments.  The  first  feeling  was 
one  of  congratulation,  that  two  enemies  of  their  country,  en 
gaged  in  acts  of  rebellion,  had  been  apprehended.  But  then  the 
question  arose  whether  the  taking  of  men,  not  soldiers,  from  a 

425 


426  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

neutral  vessel,  upon  the  open  sea,  could  be  justified,  under  the 
law  of  nations.  The  question  was  also  asked  what  effect  the  act 
would  have  upon  Great  Britain,  with  whom  our  Government 
was  anxious  to  be  on  good  terms?  The  first  feeling  of  exulta 
tion  gave  way  to  one  of  doubt  and  questioning.  So  great  a 
lawyer  as  Caleb  Gushing,  once  nominated  by  the  President,  for 
Chief  Justice,  maintained  that  the  seizure  was  right;  Chief 
Justice  Bigelow,  of  Massachusetts,  Theophilus  Parsons,  the 
head  of  the  Harvard  Law  School,  and  Edward  Everett,  who  had 
filled  such  offices  as  Minister  to  England  and  Secretary  of 
State,  also  justified  the  act  of  Captain  Wilkes.  Other  men  of 
eminence,  as  well  as,  generally,  the  press  of  the  country,  took 
the  same  view.  Congress  meeting  soon  after,  one  of  the  first 
acts  of  the  House  was  to  adopt  a  resolution,  thanking  Captain 
Wilkes  "  for  his  brave,  adroit  and  patriotic  conduct "  in  the 
arrest.  But  Sumner,  as  soon  as  he  heard  of  it,  said  the  arrest 
was  wrong  and  we  would  have  to  give  the  prisoners  up,  that 
it  was  in  direct  violation  of  the  principle  for  which  we  had  con 
tended  with  Great  Britain  in  the  War  of  1812.  He  admitted 
the  precedents  of  the  English  courts  were  the  other  wray  and 
had  probably  misled  some  who  took  the  different  view. 

The  British  Government  was  not  long  in  making  known  what 
it  thought  of  the  arrest.  The  information  reached  England  on 
November  twenty-seventh,  and  three  days  later,  instructions 
were  dispatched  to  the  English  Minister,  at  Washington,  direct 
ing  him  to  demand  the  liberation  of  the  four  men  and  the 
delivery  of  them  to  the  British  Government,  with  a  suitable 
apology.  In  a  private  letter,  accompanying  the  dispatch,  the 
Minister  was  instructed  that,  in  case  this  demand  was  not  com 
plied  with  in  seven  days,  he  should  break  up  his  legation  and 
leave  Washington.  The  contents  of  these  dispatches  were  com 
municated  to  our  Government,  on  December  nineteenth.  In 
the  meantime  troops  were  ordered  by  Great  Britain  to  Canada, 
the  militia  of  that  colony  was  drilled  and  the  dockyards  of  Eng 
land  resounded  with  the  din  of  workmen,  fitting  up  her  vessels 
for  sea.  All  this  meant  war,  in  case  her  demand  was  refused, 
the  recognition  of  the  Southern  Confederacy  and  aid,  in  every 
way,  to  the  Rebellion.  While  all  this  was  taking  place,  our 
Government  was  straining  every  nerve  to  suppress  an  uprising 
in  the  first  flush  of  victory  encouraged  by  the  surrender  of  Fort 
Sumter  and  the  successes  at  Ball's  Bluff  and  Bull  Run.  Lin 
coln  shook  his  head  gravely  and,  to  hot-headed  advisers,  signifi 
cantly  answered,  "  One  war  at  a  time,  gentlemen." 

Sumner  shared  Lincoln's  fears.  He  was  in  Washington  be 
fore  the  session  of  Congress  opened  and,  as  soon  as  he  arrived, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  427 

he  went  to  the  President  and  Secretary  of  State,  to  counsel 
caution  and  advise  against  the  adoption  of  the  act  of  Wilkes. 
He  showed  letters  to  the  President  and  afterwards  read  them  to 
the  Cabinet,  received  by  him  from  the  English  statesmen, 
Bright  and  Cobden,  showing  their  pacific  feeling  towards  the 
the  North  and  their  familiarity  with  the  true  cause  of  the  war. 
In  answer  to  Simmer's  inquiry  about  the  feeling  of  the  Admin 
istration  towards  England  growing  out  of  the  Trent  case, 
Lincoln  said  to  him,  "  There  will  be  no  war,  unless  England  is 
bent  upon  having  one."  This  assurance  Sumner  conveyed  to 
Bright,  in  a  letter,  strongly  deprecating  the  attitude  of  the 
British  Government  and  expressing  a  hope  that  pacific  counsels 
would  yet  prevail.  When  the  matter  came  up  in  the  Senate, 
Sumner,  anticipating  an  angry  discussion  and  expressions  of 
hostility  towards  England,  that  would  add  fuel  to  the  flame, 
sought  to  have  it  referred  to  his  committee,  but  to  avoid  dissen- 
tion  waived  this  and  allowed  it  to  go  to  a  different  one. 

On  December  twenty-sixth,  the  last  day  in  the  limit  set  by 
the  British  Government,  for  the  surrender  of  the  men,  the 
Secretary  of  State  notified  the  English  Minister,  they  would  be 
surrendered.  There  was  a  good  deal  of  bitterness  felt  towards 
England,  for  the  peremptory  manner  in  which  the  demand  was 
made.  Instead  of  making  complaint,  and  seeking  by  prelimi 
nary  negotiations,  to  obtain  a  peaceful  surrender  of  the  men 
and  omitting  the  peremptory  alternative  of  surrender  or  war, 
till  these  other  means  had  been  exhausted,  a  peremptory 
course  was  adopted,  at  the  start.  Indeed  the  English  Govern 
ment  anticipated  that  such  an  event  was  likely  to  happen,  for 
it  took  the  opinion  of  its  legal  advisers  upon  the  question  of  its 
rights,  before  Mason  and  Slidell  were  arrested.  In  the  dis 
patch  demanding  the  surrender,  the  British  Government  said 
it  was  willing  to  believe  that  Captain  Wilkes  was  not  acting 
under  instructions,  when  he  took  them.  And  information  that 
this  was  the  case,  and  further  that  the  United  States  Govern 
ment  would  not  complicate  the  situation  by  adopting  the  act 
hastily,  was  promptly  conveyed  to  England,  by  instructions  to 
the  American  Minister,  at  London.  Why,  then,  was  this 
peremptory  course  adopted,  by  the  English  Government,  if  it 
was  willing  to  believe  we  did  not  intend  the  act  ?  Why  was  it 
persisted  in,  and  our  pacific  intentions  not  made  public,  in 
England,  after  they  were  communicated,  to  that  government? 
These  were  questions  often  asked,  in  the  United  States,  and 
unanswered,  except  by  the  assertion  that  the  English  Govern 
ment  desired  war. 

Naturally,    these    things    provoked    bitter    comment.      The 


428  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

delivery  up  of  the  men,  by  our  government  added  to  the  bitter 
ness.  Commenting  on  England's  conduct,  in  the  House,  on 
January  seventh,  one  speaker  declared :  "  She  is  treasuring  up 
to  herself  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath.  She  has  excited 
in  the  hearts  of  this  people  a  deep  and  bitter  sense  of  wrong,  of 
injury  inflicted,  at  a. moment  when  we  could  not  respond.  It 
is  night  with  us  now;  but  through  the  watches  of  the  night, 
even,  we  shall  be  girding  ourselves  to  strike  the  blow  of  right 
eous  retribution."  Another,  Vallandigham,  of  Ohio,  destined 
to  a  course  of  singular  bitterness  towards  the  North,  in  her 
efforts  to  suppress  the  Eebellion,  declared  that  "  for  the  first 
time,  in  our  national  history,  have  we  strutted  insolently  into  a 
quarrel,  without  right,  and  then  basely  crept  out  of  it,  without 
honor/' 

When  these  things  were  said,  the  men  had  been  delivered  up, 
but  the  position  of  the  Administration  was  being  misrepresented 
and  misunderstood,  at  a  time  when  it  needed  friends.  It  was' 
important  that  the  situation  be  understood,  both  at  home  and 
abroad.  Sumner  had  privately  urged  the  Administration  to 
take  the  step  it  did ;  he  was  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Eelations,  the  most  important  officer  in  the  country,  in 
such  a  crisis,  except  the  President  and  his  Secretary  of  State ; 
and  above  all  he  was  well-versed  in  international  law.  The  task 
therefore  naturally  fell  to  him.  Two  days  after  these  bitter 
expressions,  in  the  House,  he  spoke  in  the  Senate. 

It  being  announced  that  he  was  to  speak,  at  an  early  hour, 
the  galleries  of  the  Senate  began  to  fill,  and,  by  the  time  he 
commenced,  notwithstanding  the  fog,  the  rain  and  the  mud  of 
the  wretched  morning,  they  were  crowded.  The  ladies'  gallery 
was  filled.  The  wife  of  Vice-President  Hamlin,  with  a  party 
of  her  friends  occupied  seats,  in  the  diplomatic  gallery,  which 
was  also  crowded.  General  Fremont  was  there  and  prominent 
Abolitionists.  Every  important  foreign  minister,  in  Washing 
ton,  except  only  Lord  Lyons,  the  English  Minister,  whom  eti 
quette  kept  away ;  and  members  of  the  Cabinet,  Chase  and  Cam 
eron,  occupied  seats  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate.  The  Senators 
themselves,  generally  so  careless  of  each  other's  speeches,  were 
willing  to  hear  him,  upon  this  subject,  and  listened  with  at 
tention. 

The  speech  was  impressively  delivered,  so  kind  and  so  calm, 
in  rebuke,  and  yet  convincing.  His  argument  was  strictly  a 
legal  one.  He  lifted  the  case  out  of  the  narrow  limits,  to  which 
it  had  been  confined,  by  others,  that  the  arrest  was  wrong, 
because  the  Trent,  as  well  as  the  prisoners,  had  not  been  brought 
into  a  port  where  the  case  could  be  adjudicated  upon,  by  a 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  429 

prize  court,  a  position  which  was  untenable;  because  if  the 
seizure  was  wrong,  it  could  not  be  made  right,  by  increasing  the 
extent  of  the  seizure.  Sumner  placed  it  upon  the  broad  ground 
that  a  neutral  ship  could  not  be  stopped,  on  the  high  seas,  where 
there  was  no  court  to  adjudicate  upon  the  rights  of  the  parties 
and  there  be  subjected  to  a  search,  and,  if  persons,  not  soldiers, 
were  found,  they  be  taken,  by  force,  into  the  custody  of  a  bellig 
erent  and  carried  away.  Such  a  law  would  make  all  ships  and 
their  cargoes  on  the  high  seas,  perhaps  thousands  of  miles  from 
land,  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  a  lieutenant,  upon  the 
quarter-deck.  It  would  subject  neutral  ships  to  insufferable 
annoyance  and  innocent  men  to  infinite  hazard.  If  a  right 
to  the  custody  of  such  persons  was  claimed,  it  should  be  asserted 
in  port,  within  the  jurisdiction  of  some  court,  where,  without 
inconvenience,  and  with  little  expense,  the  question  could  be 
adjudicated.  He  insisted  that  enemies,  unless  soldiers,  in 
actual  service,  could  not  be  taken  out  of  a  neutral  ship,  that 
such  persons  as  Mason  and  Slidell  were  not  contraband  of  war, 
so  as  to  affect  the  voyage  of  a  neutral  with  illegality. 

He  summarized  his  own  position  thus :  "  If  I  am  correct,  in 
this  review,  then  the  conclusion  is  inevitable.  The  seizure  of 
the  Eebel  emissaries,  on  board  a  neutral  ship,  cannot  be  justi 
fied,  according  to  declared  American  principles  and  practice. 
There  is  no  single  point,  where  the  seizure  is  not  questionable, 
unless  we  invoke  British  precedents  and  practice,  which,  be 
yond  doubt,  led  Captain  Wilkes  into  his  mistake.  *•  *  *  He 
was  mistaken.  There  was  a  better  example ;  it  was  the  constant, 
uniform,  unhesitating  practice  of  his  own  country,  on  the  ocean, 
conceding  always  the  greatest  immunities  to  neutral  ships, 
unless  sailing  to  blockaded  ports,  refusing  to  consider  dis 
patches  as  contraband  of  war,  refusing  to  consider  persons, 
other  than  soldiers  and  officers,  as  contraband  of  war,  and  pro 
testing  always,  against  an  adjudication  of  personal  rights,  by 
summary  judgment  of  the  quarter-deck." 

The  United  States  had  taken  this  position,  almost  at  the 
beginning  of  her  history,  he  insisted,  and  had  consistently  fol 
lowed  it,  ever  since.  He  quoted  numerous  of  her  treaties,  to 
prove  this.  On  the  other  hand,  Great  Britain  had  denied  it 
and  this  had  been  the  chief  cause  of  the  War  of  1812.  There 
were  precedents,  in  the  reports  of  cases,  tried  in  her  courts,  of 
that  kind.  Following  these,  many  of  the  writers,  who  justi 
fied  the  act  of  Captain  Wilkes,  as  well  as  Captain  Wilkes  him 
self,  had  been  mistaken.  England  had  refused  to  recognize  our 
position,  even  at  the  close  of  the  War  of  1812;  but  now,  at 
last,  by  actual  experience,  she  had  been  compelled  to  come  to 


430  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

it.  The  tables  were  turned.  By  the  act  of  Captain  Wilkes  we 
were  put  in  the  position  England  had  held,  and  which  we  could 
not  maintain,  without  violence  to  all  our  own  precedents ;  while 
England,  when  brought  to  experience  the  wrong,  she  had  in 
flicted,  upon  us,  thousands  of  times,  prior  to  1812,  had  been 
compelled,  by  a  sense  of  right,  to  turn  her  back,  upon  her  own 
principle  and  acknowledge  we  were  right.  So  that,  while  the 
Administration  had  given  up  "  two  old  men,"  of  insignificant 
importance,  we  gained  the  acquiescence  of  England  to  an  im 
mortal  principle  of  international  law.  Truly  the  victories  of 
peace  had  become  greater  than  those  of  war! 

This  speech  elevated  Sumner,  in  the  estimation  of  the  coun 
try.  By  such  efforts,  where  slavery  was  hardly  mentioned  and 
where,  in  a  closely  reasoned  discourse,  upon  an  important  prin 
ciple  of  international  law,  he  furnished  a  classic  upon  the  sub 
ject  discussed,  he  taught  men  that  he  was  not  a  mere  agitator, 
but  a  broad-minded  statesman,  equipped  for  every  requirement 
of  his  position. 

Sumner  had  now  become  the  most  prominent  figure  in  the 
Senate.  His  seat  was  most  inquired  for,  by  strangers  visit 
ing  Washington,  and  when  it  was  announced  that  he  was  to 
speak,  the  chamber  and  the  galleries  were  filled.  His  stalwart 
frame  six  feet,  three  inches  tall,  towered,  by  his  desk,  on  the 
outer  circle.  His  deep,  resonant  voice,  filling  with  distinctness 
every  nook  and  corner  of  the  chamber,  fell  easily  upon  the  ear 
of  any  listener.  His  speeches,  carefully  prepared,  in  advance, 
as  great  orations  for  some  great  occasions,  seldom  fell  short  or 
disappointed  the  expectation  of  his  audience.  His  motions, 
were  vigorous,  and  yet  graceful,  and  there  was  a  charm  and  an 
impressiveness,  in  his  manner,  and  a  depth  of  conviction,  in  his 
words,  which  added  to  his  wealth  of  learning  and  his  rhetoric, 
made  a  lasting  impression.  No  one  could  question  his  sincerity 
or  his  earnestness. 

His  position  was  already  somewhat  historic.  The  cause  for 
which  he  had  so  long  stood,  in  public  life,  as  the  chief  repre 
sentative,  was  now  the  reigning  one,  in  Washington.  When  he 
first  entered  the  Senate,  ten  years  before,  there  were  only  two  of 
his  political  belief,  Chase  of  Ohio  and  Hale  of  New  Hampshire. 
He  was  then  denied  a  place,  on  any  of  the  committees  of  the 
Senate,  as  being  "  outside  of  any  healthy  political  organization." 
Now,  he  was  the  Chairman  of  the  principal  committee  of  that 
body,  and  his  party  held  the  Presidency  and  both  Houses  of 
Congress.  In  all  the  intervening  years,  that  had  brought  these 
changes  about,  he  had  stood  manfully  for  his  convictions,  with 
out  fear  and  without  compromise.  Pie  had  aided  to  bring  these 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  431 

changes,  by  years  of  toil  and  abuse  and  suffering.  To  the  great 
public  who  had  watched  his  course,  he  sustained  something  of 
the  character  of  a  living  martyr,  for  a  triumphant  cause.  To 
few  mortals,  is  it  given,  to  occupy  such  a  place.  Oftenest,  like 
Lincoln,  they  are  in  their  grave,  before  the  day  of  triumph.  To 
Sumner  it  brought  added  labor  and  responsibility. 

There  has  seldom  been  a  more  laborious  session  of  Congress, 
than  the  first  regular  session,  after  this  election  of  Lincoln. 
The  qualification  of  members  of  Congress,  was  called  in  ques 
tion,  as  never  before.  The  Rebellion  had  introduced  new  re 
lations.  Some  of  the  Senators  as  Jefferson  Davis,  Toombs  and 
Mason  had  voluntarily  abandoned  their  seats,  some,  as  Breckin- 
ridge,  had  been  expelled,  without  ceremony,  still  others  held 
to  their  places  and,  when  questioned,  insisted  upon  their  quali 
fication.  Among  the  last,  was  Jesse  D.  Bright,  of  Indiana.  A 
resolution  for  his  expulsion  was  offered,  in  the  Senate,  by  Wil 
kinson  of  Minnesota.  The  charge  against  him  was,  that  he  had 
written  a  letter,  addressed  to  "  His  Excellency,  Jefferson  Davis, 
President  of  the  Confederacy  of  States,"  introducing  one 
Thomas  B.  Lincoln,  of  Texas,  adding,  "  He  visits  your  capital, 
mainly  to  dispose  of  what  he  regards  a  great  improvement,  in 
fire-arms.  T  commend  him  to  your  favorable  consideration  " 
etc.  Bright  disclaimed  any  recollection  of  having  written  the 
letter,  but  admitted  that  if  Lincoln  said  he  did,  it  was  probably 
correct.  Lincoln  had  not  reached  Davis,  with  the  letter,  but 
when  arrested  had  given  it  up,  and  so  it  had  appeared  against 
Bright.  Sumner  insisted  that  this  was  treason  and  advocated 
his  expulsion  and  he  was  expelled.  The  judgment  seems  a  harsh 
one,  looking  at  it,  in  our  calmer  times.  It  was  such  a  letter 
as,  inadvertently,  might  have  been  given,  in  the  early  days  of 
the  Rebellion,  by  a  public  official,  to  a  friend,  seeking  an  intro 
duction,  to  one,  with  whom  the  writer  had  lately  served,  in  the 
Senate. 

General  Lane  of  Kansas  had  been  elected  to  the  Senate  but 
before  he  had  taken  his  seat,  President  Lincoln  had  designated 
him  as  Brigadier-General  of  volunteers,  and  he  had  entered  up 
on  his  duties  as  such,  without  any  formal  commission  or  ap 
pointment,  from  the  United  States  Government.  Afterwards, 
upon  being  informed,  that  he  couM  not  hold  both  positions,  he 
-abandoned  his  place,  in  the  Army,  and  qualified  as  Senator. 
Meantime  the  Governor  of  Kansas,  assuming  that  he  had 
vacated  his  right  to  a  seat,  in  the  Senate,  appointed  Frederic 
P.  Stanton.  Sumner  spoke  in  favor  of  Lane,  and  insisted  that 
he  had  not  been  a  Senator,  when  he  served  under  the  Presi 
dent's  designation,  for  he  had  not  qualified.  He  was  only  a 


432  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Senator  elect.  Nor,  he  insisted,  was  he,  in  the  language  of  the 
Constitution,  "  holding  any  office  under  the  United  States," 
when  in  the  military  service,  for  he  had  been  a  Brigadier  Gen 
eral  under  a  commission  from  his  State,  like  Colonel  Baker,  the 
President  not  then  having  the  authority  to  make  the  appoint 
ment,  the  law  authorizing  it,  not  having  been  passed.  The  out 
come  of  the  contest  was  that  Lane  was  seated,  though  the  Judi 
ciary  Committee  of  the  Senate  had  reported  against  his  right. 

The  position,  of  the  States  in  rebellion,  early  became  one  of 
perplexity.  On  the  eleventh  of  February,  1861,  Sumner  intro 
duced,  in  the  Senate,  a  series  of  resolutions,  intended  to  fix  the 
relation  of  these  States  to  the  National  Government.  The  reso 
lutions  declared  that  the  Ordinances  of  Secession  adopted  by 
these  States  were  void,  but,  if  sustained  by  force,  became  an 
abdication  of  all  their  rights,  so  that  the  territory  of  the  States 
in  rebellion  came  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Congress,  just  as 
the  Territories  were;  in  other  words,  that  State  rebellion  was 
State  suicide,  that  every  act  of  the  men,  in  rebellion,  was 
utterly  lawless,  that  the  termination  of  the  State,  terminated 
all  local  institutions  created  by  the  State ;  and  that  slavery,  be 
ing  thus  created,  fell  with  the  State;  that  it  was  the  duty  of 
Congress  to  see  that  slavery  in  these  States  ceased  to  exist,  in 
fact,  as  it  already  had  ceased  to  exist,  in  law;  that  a  recogni 
tion  of  slavery,  by  a  civil  or  military  official  of  the  United 
States,  would  be  giving  aid  to  the  Eebellion  and  would  besides 
be  a  reduction  to  slavery  of  persons  that,  by  act  of  the  State,  had 
been  made  free ;  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  National  Govern 
ment,  to  protect  those  formerly  held  as  slaves,  in  the  freedom 
they  had  thus  acquired;  that  Congress  should  also  assume 
complete  jurisdiction  of  such  vacated  territory  and  proceed  to 
establish  there  republican  forms  of  government.  When  the 
resolutions  had  been  read,  Sumner  moved  that  they  be  laid  on 
the  table  and  be  printed,  adding  that  he  hoped,  at  some  future 
day,  to  call  them  up,  for  consideration.  Others  sought  to  have 
them  referred  to  a  committee,  hoping  thus  to  be  rid  of  them 
permanently.  Sumner's  motion  prevailed,  though  the  wish 
to  avoid  a  discussion  of  the  questions  thus  presented  had  prob 
ably  more  to  do  with  the  result,  than  anything  else. 

These  resolutions  created  a  sensation.  The  doctrine  that 
State  rebellion  was  State  suicide  and  reduced  the  rebellious 
State  to  the  condition  of  one  of  the  Territories,  was  startling, 
to  many  of  Sumner's  political  associates.  Leading  Republican 
members  of  the  Senate  made  haste  to  disclaim  any  party  re 
sponsibility,  for  the  doctrines  of  the  resolutions.  They  ad 
mitted  Sumner's  right  to  introduce  them,  as  he  might  any  other 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER          433 

measure  he  pleased,  but  they  insisted,  in  their  speeches,  com 
menting  on  them,  that  the  party  was  not  to  be  held  responsible 
for  what  was  merely  his  individual  act  or  opinion.  The  resolu 
tions  were,  indeed,  far  in  advance  of  the  public  opinion  of  that 
time.  There  was  still  a  disposition  to  hold  on  to  slavery,  and, 
especially,  not  to  disturb  the  property  rights  of  loyal  slave 
holders.  Davis  of  Kentucky,  two  days  after  the  introduction 
of  these  resolutions,  introduced  counter  ones  enforcing  this 
idea  of  protection  to  loyal  slaveholders.  They  were  also  ordered 
to  be  laid  upon  the  table  and  printed.  After  some  discus 
sion,  however,  the  whole  matter  dropped  out  of  sight  and 
eventually  disappeared.  Sumner  prepared  a  speech,  for  delivery 
in  the  Senate  defending'  his  position,  but  an  opportunity  not 
presenting,  the  material  was  used,  in  an  article  published  in  the 
Atlantic  Monthly  in  October,  1863.  His  object  was  to  destroy 
slavery,  but  this  was  accomplished  a  few  months  later  by  the 
Proclamation  of  Emancipation,  by  President  Lincoln. 

Yet  these  resolutions,  introduced,  in  February,  1862,  by 
Sumner,  show  his  foresight  and  illustrate  how,  so  often,  he 
strode  ahead  of  his  colleagues.  The  very  Kepublican  Senators 
who  disowned  these  resolutions  in  1862,  accepted  the  doctrine 
of  State  suicide,  in  1867,  when  demanding  colored  suffrage,  as 
ordained  by  Congress,  as  a  condition  of  reconstruction,  in  the 
States,  that  had  been  in  rebellion.  Doolittle  of  Wisconsin,  on 
the  latter  occasion,  unwilling  to  go  with  others,  declared  that 
more  than  twenty  Eepublican  Senators,  who  had  stood  with 
him,  advocating  reconstruction  upon  the  white  basis,  in  1862, 
had  in  1867  gone  over  to  Sumner's  side  and  advocated  his 
theory  of  reconstruction  upon  the  basis  of  negro  suffrage. 
Fessenden,  himself  one  of  the  ablest  men  who  ever  sat  in  the 
Senate,  completely  changed  his  opinion.  In  1862,  discussing 
Sumner's  resolutions  he  said :  "  I  dissent  entirely  from  the  con 
clusions  of  the  honorable  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  as 
stated  in  his  resolutions."  In  1866,  he  declared  that  these 
States,  "  having  by  this  treasonable  withdrawal  from  Congress, 
and  by  flagrant  rebellion  and  war,  forfeited  all  civil  and  polit 
ical  rights  and  privileges  under  the  Federal  Constitution,  can 
only  be  restored  thereto  by  the  permission  and  authority  of  that 
constitutional  power,  against  which  they  rebelled,  and  by 
which  they  were  subdued." 

Hendricks,  the  Democratic  leader  of  the  Senate,  afterwards 
Vice-President,  twitting  his  Eepublican  colleagues  one  day, 
upon  this  change  of  opinion  said :  tc  the  Senator  from  Massa 
chusetts  steps  out  boldly,  declares  his  doctrine,  and  then  he  is 
approached,  and  finally  he  governs.  *  *  *  He  was  told  some- 


434  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

what  sneeringly,  two  years  ago,  that  among  his  party  friends 
he  stood  alone ;  and  to-day  they  all  stand  upon  his  position/' 

But  such  men  as  John  Jay,  Charles  A.  Dana  and  Park  Ben 
jamin  of  New  York,  out  of  politics,  but  of  ability  and  inde 
pendence  of  thought,  distinctly  approved  Sumner's  resolutions. 
On  March  sixth,  1862,  a  public  meeting  was  called  at  Cooper's 
Institute,  New  York  City.  The  call  for  it  asked  the  presence 
of  all  who  concurred  in  the  conviction  that  the  traitorous 
power,  calling  itself  The  Confederate  States,  instead  of  achiev 
ing  the  destruction  of  the  Nation  had  thereby  only  destroyed 
slavery  and  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  National  Government 
to  provide  against  its  restoration.  Carl  Schurz  was  among  the 
speakers.  Letters  were  read  from  Sumner,  Preston  King, 
Henry  Wilson,  David  Wilmot  and  George  W.  Julian.  Resolu 
tions,  in  harmony  with  those  offered  by  Sumner,  in  the  Sen 
ate,  were  adopted  and  forwarded  by  the  Secretary  to  Sumner, 
with  the  request  that  he  present  them  to  the  President  and  to 
Congress.  The  German  Republican  Central  Committee  of  the 
city  and  county  of  New  York  also  passed  a  resolution  indors 
ing  Sumner's  position. 

On  the  very  day  of  this  meeting,  the  President  communicated 
to  Congress  a  scheme  for  compensated  emancipation.  This  was 
his  first  official  step  towards  emancipation.  This  means  was 
soon  found  to  be  impracticable,  on  a  large  scale. 

When  Sumner  arrived  in  Washington  at  the  beginning  of  the 
session,  he  had  gone  to  the  President,  to  press  the  matter  of 
emancipation.  He  found  the  President  willing  to  talk  about 
it,  but  still  unwilling  to  take  decisive  steps.  The  President 
read  to  him  a  draft  of  his  annual  message  to  Congress;  and 
Sumner  was  disappointed  at  not  finding  in  it  a  recommenda 
tion  on  this  subject.  He  was  still  more  disappointed  to  learn, 
from  the  President  himself,  that  he  had  stricken  out  of  Secre 
tary  Cameron's  report  a  reference  to  this  subject.  Cameron 
was  in  favor  of  it,  as  were  also  Chase  and  Stanton  of  the 
Cabinet.  But  Sumner  easily  saw  that  Lincoln's  heart  was  right 
and  that  he  was  working  it  out,  in  his  own  way.  Not  a  week 
passed  without  Sumner  seeing  the  President  once,  or  oftener, 
and  pressing  the  matter  upon  him.  At  length,  on  the  morning 
of  March  sixth,  the  President  sent  for  Sumner  to  come  to  him, 
as  soon  as  convenient  after  breakfast.  When  Sumner  reached 
the  White  House,  the  President  told  him  he  had  something  to 
read  to  him  and  produced  his  special  message  to  Congress,  rec 
ommending  compensated  emancipation.  It  was  not  Sumner's 
way  to  deal  gradually  with  a  wrong,  and  he  so  argued  with  the 
President;  but  he  admitted  that  this  recommendation  was  a 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  435 

step  in  the  right  direction.  Sumner  took  the  Message  and 
while  reading  it  criticised  certain  passages  and  upon  the  sug 
gestion  of  the  President  undertook  to  change  the  wording  of 
one.  After  working  at  it  a  little  while,  he  was  interrupted,  by 
the  President  proposing  to  strike  the  whole  of  the  passage  out. 
Sumner  continued  to  study  the  paper,  when  Lincoln  playfully 
interrupted  him,  with  the  remark,  "  Enough,  you  must  go  now 
or  the  boys  "  (referring  to  his  private  secretaries,  Nicolay  and 
Kay),  "won't  have  time  to  copy  it".  And  so  Sumner  left, 
the  President  assuring  him,  he  would  communicate  it  to  Con 
gress  that  day. 

The  Message,  recommending  compensated  emancipation  was 
accordingly  communicated  to  Congress.  But  nothing  was  ever 
done  under  it,  except  the  adoption,  by  both  Houses,  of  a  resolu 
tion  recommending  that  the  Government  ought  to  co-operate 
with  any  State  which  may  adopt  gradual  abolition  of  Slavery, 
giving  to  such  State  pecuniary  aid,  to  be  used  by  it,  in  bringing 
about  this  change. 

But  the  Message  did  more  good  than  this.  It  paved  the 
way  for  the  Proclamation  of  Emancipation,  which  the  President 
issued  a  few  months  later.  And  it  materially  aided  in  the 
scheme  of  compensated  emancipation,  in  the  District  of  Colum 
bia,  then  pending  in  Congress.  At  the  beginning  of  this  ses 
sion,  Sumner's  colleague,  Wilson,  had  introduced  a  bill  provid 
ing  for  emancipation  in  the  District  and  creating  a  commission 
to  appraise  the  claims  on  account  of  slaves  thus  liberated,  limit 
ing  the  allowance  in  the  aggregate,  to  an  amount  equal  to  three 
hundred  dollars  a  slave,  and  appropriating  a  million  dollars  to 
pay  loyal  owners,  for  the  slaves  thus  liberated.  There  was  ad 
ded  to  it  an  appropriation,  to  aid  such  slaves  as  wished  to  emi 
grate  to  Haiti  or  Liberia.  Sumner  spoke  at  length,  on  this  bill, 
on  March  31,  1862,  advocating  its  passage  by  the  Senate.  He 
did  not  like  the  compensation  feature.  He  was  unwilling  to 
recognize  the  title  of  the  master,  implied  in  compensation.  He 
therefore  refused,  in  speaking  of  it,  to  call  it  "  compensation  " 
but  preferred  the  term  "ransom",  paid  for  the  slave  and  for 
his  benefit  and  as  his  right,  after  years  of  unrequited  toil, 
rather  than  as  a  compensation  to  the  master  for  a  right  sur 
rendered.  He  upheld  it  as  a  duty,  on  the  part  of  the  country, 
for  its  complicity  in  maintaining,  so  long,  slavery,  in  a  place, 
exclusively  under  the  national  jurisdiction.  He  recognized  it 
also  as  the  gentlest,  quietest  and  surest  way  in  which  the  change 
could  be  accomplished  and  therefore  the  most  practicable. 

The  bill  passed  the  Senate  on  April  third  and  the  House  on 
April  eleventh ;  but  it  was  not  approved  by  the  President  until 


436  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

April  sixteenth.  In  the  meantime,  there  was  some  question,  as 
to  the  cause  of  this  delay  of  the  President.  Sumner,  anxious 
lest  it  should  fail,  sought  him  and  urged  him  to  approve  it. 
In  the  course  of  their  conversation,  Sumner  said  to  him :  "  Do 
you  know  who,  at  this  moment,  is  the  largest  slaveholder,  in 
this  country?  It  is  Abraham  Lincoln;  for  he  holds  all  the 
three  thousand  slaves  of  the  District,  which  is  more  than  any 
other  person  in  the  country  holds." 

As  the  first  practical  act  of  emancipation,  it  was  hailed  with 
delight  by  the  colored  people,  who  had  so  long  waited  for  some 
definite  action  of  this  kind.  Fred  Douglass,  who  had  endured 
the  lash  of  the  master  upon  his  back,  made  haste  to  express  his 
gratitude  to  Sumner. 

"  I  trust  I  am  not  dreaming,"  he  wrote,  "  but  the  events  tak 
ing  place  seem  like  a  dream.  If  slavery  is  really  dead  in  the 
District  of  Columbia,  and  merely  waiting  for  the  ceremony  of 
'  Dust  to  Dust '  by  the  President,  to  you  more  than  to  any 
other  American  statesman  belongs  the  honor  of  this  great 
triumph  of  justice,  liberty  and  sound  policy.  I  rejoice  for  my 
freed  brothers, — and,  Sir,  I  rejoice  for  you.  You  have  lived  to 
strike  down  in  Washington  the  power  that  lifted  the  bludgeon 
against  your  own  free  voice.  I  take  nothing  from  the  good  and 
brave  men  who  have  co-operated  with  you.  There  is,  or  ought 
to  be  a  head  to  everybody;  and  whether  you  will  it  or  not,  the 
slaveholder  and  the  slave  look  to  you  as  the  best  embodiment 
of  the  anti-slavery  idea  now  in  the  councils  of  the  nation." 

While  the  bill  was  before  the  Senate,  Sumner  moved  an 
amendment  to  it.  The  bill  provided  that  the  Commission 
created  to  appraise  the  claims  on  account  of  slaves  liberated 
should  have  power  to  subpoena  witnesses  and  compel  their  at 
tendance  before  it,  as  in  civil  cases  before  courts  of  justice. 
Sumner's  amendment  provided  that  in  so  doing  there  should 
be  no  exclusion  of  any  witness  on  account  of  color.  The  old 
Maryland  statute  that  was  still  in  force  in  the  District,  did  not 
permit  colored  persons  to  testify  in  any  case,  where  a  white  man 
was  a  party.  This  amendment  removed  the  disability  of  colored 
persons,  before  this  commission.  The  amendment  was  agreed 
to  and  became  part  of  the  law.  It  was  the  first  movement  for 
the  civil  rights  of  the  colored  people.  But  it  only  applied  to 
proceedings  under  this  one  act.  A  little  later,  on  July  seventh, 
when  the  Senate  had  under  consideration  a  supplementary  bill, 
on  emancipation  in  the  District,  Sumner  moved  an  amendment 
to  it,  that  in  all  judicial  proceedings  in  the  District  there 
should  be  no  exclusion  of  any  witness  on  account  of  color.  This 
amendment  also  was  carried  and  became  a  law.  Thus  in  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  437 

District  of  Columbia  was  removed  forever,  the  disability  of 
colored  persons  as  witnesses  and  thus  ended  the  outrage,  as 
Thaddeus  Stevens  called  it  of  not  allowing  any  man  of  credit, 
whether  white  or  black,  to  be  a  witness. 

Sumner  aided,  at  this  session  of  Congress,  in  removing 
another  discrimination  by  the  National  Government,  against 
the  colored  race.  The  republics  of  Haiti  and  Liberia,  com 
posed  of  colored  people,  with  governments  modeled  upon  our 
own,  and  Liberia  largely  colonized  by  people  of  our  own,  had 
thus  far  never  been  recognized  by  us.  This  fact  could  only 
be  explained  by  the  prejudice  towards  the  colored  race,  on 
the  part  of  the  slave-owners  who  had  so  long  dominated  the 
National  Government.  While  other  nations  received  and  sent 
ambassadors  to  them,  ours  did  not.  The  failure  of  our  govern 
ment  to  recognize  them  was  commented  upon,  by  President  Lin 
coln,  in  his  annual  message  and  he  recommended  an  appropria 
tion  for  maintaining  a  charge  d'affaires  near  each  of  them. 
Sumner  moved  the  reference  of  this  part  of  the  message  to  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  and  having  called  for  all  the 
documents  and  the  files  of  the  Senate  on  the  subject,  he  soon 
thereafter  reported,  from  the  Committee,  a  bill  authorizing  the 
President  to  appoint  diplomatic  representatives,  to  both  Re 
publics  and  in  a  speech  setting  out  the  natural  advantages  of 
the  countries  and  their  importance  to  our  commerce,  he  urged 
the  passage  of  the  bill. 

It  was  opposed  by  the  Senators  from  the  slave  States,  not  in 
rebellion.  They  gave  the  same  reasons  for  their  opposition, 
that  had  previously  been  given,  by  their  brethren  of  the  slave 
States,  whenever  the  subject  had  been  before  Congress. 

Saulsbury,  of  Delaware,  admitting  that  the  bill  would  now 
pass,  added :  "  I  predict  that,  in  twelve  months,  some  negro 
will  walk  upon  the  floor  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  and 
carry  his  family  into  that  gallery,  which  is  set  apart  for  foreign 
ministers.  If  that  is  agreeable  to  the  taste  and  feeling  of  the 
people  of  this  country,  it  is  not  to  mine ;  and  I  only  say  that  I 
will  not  be  responsible  for  any  such  act." 

Davis,  of  Kentucky,  was  disgusted  with  the  subject  of  sla 
very  in  the  Senate  Chamber  and  was  opposed  to  this  bill  for  the 
reason  that  if  we  sent  ambassadors  to  Haiti  and  Liberia,  they 
would  send  their  ministers  to  our  country,  and  our  President 
would  be  obliged  to  receive  them,  on  an  equality,  with  the 
representatives  from  other  powers.  A  full  blooded  negro  from 
them  would  have  to  be  received  by  us,  on  the  same  equality  as 
a  White  representative  from  a  white  people.  When  the  Pres 
ident  entertained  the  wives  and  daughters  of  the  white  ambas- 


438  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

sadors,  he  would  have  to  entertain,  with  them,  the  black  wives 
and  daughters  of  these  colored  representatives.  This,  Davis 
could  not  endure.  He  recalled  an  illustration.  When  the  re 
fined  French  court  admitted  the  representative  of  Soulonque, 
"  who  then  denominated  himself,  or  was  called,  the  Emperor  of 
Dominica,  I  think,"  said  Davis. 

"  Of  Haiti,"  interrupted  Sumner. 

"  Well,"  replied  Davis,  "  a  great  big  negro  fellow,  dressed  out 
with  his  silver  or  gold  lace  clothes,  in  the  most  fantastic  and 
gaudy  style,  presented  himself  in  the  court  of  Louis  Napoleon, 
and,  I  admit,  was  received.  Now,  Sir,  I  want  no  such  exhibi 
tion  as  that  in  our  capital  and  in  our  Government.  The 
American  minister,  Mr.  Mason,  was  present  on  that  occasion, 
and  he  was  sleeved  by  some  Englishman — I  have  forgotten 
his  name — who  was  present,  who  pointed  him  to  the  ambas 
sador  of  Soulonque,  and  said,  '  What  do  you  think  of  him  ? ' 
Mr.  Mason  turned  round  and  said,  '  I  think,  clothes  and  all, 
he  is  worth  a  thousand  dollars/" 

Notwithstanding  such  objections,  however,  the  bill  passed 
both  Houses  of  Congress  and  became  a  law. 

Another  step  was  taken  at  this  session  of  Congress  for  the 
protection  of  the  colored  race  and  the  destruction  of  slavery. 
Notwithstanding  the  slave  trade  had  been  abolished  by  statute 
and  declared  to  be  piracy,  so  long  ago  as  1820  by  the  United 
States,  and,  by  England,  in  1807,  yet  owing  to  the  inefficient 
manner  in  which  these  laws  were  executed,  negroes  were  still 
captured,  in  Africa,  and  brought  to  America  and  sold  into 
slavery.  No  conviction  under  the  United  States  statute  was 
had,  until  1862,  when  Nathaniel  Gordon,  master  of  a  vessel, 
called  the  Erie,  was  convicted  and  hanged,  in  New  York.  Early 
in  the  spring  of  that  year,  Sumner  had  a  conference  with  Sec 
retary  Seward,  on  the  subject.  As  a  consequence,  negotiations 
were  opened  with  the  British  Minister  and  a  treaty  was  soon 
made,  with  Great  Britain,  for  a  restricted  right  of  search,  of 
vessels  supposed  to  be  engaged  in  the  trade,  and  for  the  crea 
tion  of  mixed  courts  for  the  condemnation  and  destruction  of 
the  ships  found  to  be  engaged  in  the  business,  leaving  the  slave- 
trader  himself  to  be  tried  in  the  home  courts  of  the  captor. 
Sumner  moved  the  ratification  of  the  treaty  in  the  Senate,  on 
the  twenty-second  of  April,  and  spoke  in  favor  of  it.  The 
treaty  was  unanimously  ratified.  When  Sumner  carried  the 
news  to  Secretary  Seward,  late  in  the  afternoon,  he  found  him 
reclining  upon  a  sofa,  in  his  private  office.  "  Where,"  said  he, 
rising  in  astonishment,  "were  the  Democrats?"  In  a  subse 
quent  bill,  reported  by  Sumner  from  his  Committee,  a  judge 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  439 

and  arbitrator  for  the  mixed  courts  to  be  held  respectively  at 
New  York,  Sierra  Leone  and  at  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  were  pro 
vided  for  and  thus  the  trade  became  almost  impossible.  The 
terror  of  the  law,  with  such  provisions  in  it,  was  sufficient  to 
destroy  the  traffic  and  eight  years  later  the  courts,  being  without 
business,  were  abolished. 

Two  subjects  pressed  themselves  upon  the  attention  of  Con 
gress  at  this  session, — first,  the  punishment  of  the  men  in  re 
bellion;  second,  the  provision  of  means  to  sustain  the  war. 
These  two  classes  of  bills  were  known  as  the  Confiscation  Bills 
and  the  Eevenue  Bills.  While  not  of  the  permanent  interest 
of  some  others,  they  were  matters  that  could  not  escape  imme 
diate  attention.  They  naturally  awakened  a  good  deal  of 
interest. 

From  early  in  the  session  until  the  last  day,  July  seventeenth, 
the  consideration  of  the  Confiscation  Bills  was,  in  some  form 
almost  constantly  before  the  Senate.  A  majority  of  the  Sena 
tors  agreed  that  such  a  bill  should  be  passed.  They  agreed  too 
that  slavery  being  responsible  for  the  war,  it  should  be  made 
to  feel  the  punishment  and  that  the  natural  way  to  do  this  was 
in  the  emancipation  of  slaves.  The  differences  were  in  mat 
ters  of  detail  and  they  took  a  great  part  of  the  time  of  the 
session  in  their  discussion  though  not  destined  to  prove  of 
permanent  importance. 

A  bill  introduced  by  Sumner  provided  that  all  persons  in 
rebellion  or  who  aided  it  or  gave  to  those  engaged  in  it  aid  or 
comfort,  forfeited  all  claims  to  their  slaves,  who  thereby  be 
came  free.  If  the  master  of  any  fugitive  slave  claimed  him, 
it  would  be  a  defence  to  his  claim  to  show  that  the  master  had 
engaged  in  or  aided  the  Rebellion.  Loyalty  had  to  be  proven 
as  one  of  the  elements  of  title  to  the  slave.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  bill  which  became  a  law  by  the  President's  approval  on  the 
last  day  of  the  session,  provided  that  only  the  slaves  who  had 
escaped  from  Eebel  masters  and  had  come  within  the  lines  of 
the  Union  army  or  under  the  control  of  the  United  States  gov 
ernment  should  be  free.  The  difference  between  the  two  bills 
was  that  Sumner's  was  broader  than  the  bill  that  became  a 
law.  By  his  bill  all  slaves  of  all  rebels,  wherever  they  were, 
were  free.  By  the  law  passed  only  such  of  these  slaves,  as  es 
caped  to  the  lines  of  the  United  States  government,  became 
free.  Little  difference  did  it  make  after  the  publication  of  the 
President's  Proclamation  of  Emancipation  two  months  later, 
which  bill  became  a  law.  For  by  the  preliminary  proclamation 
of  September  twenty-second,  freedom  was  promised  to  all 
slaves  within  the  States,  the  people  whereof  should  be  in  re- 


440  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

bullion  on  January  first,  following.  So  that  not  only  did  all 
the  slaves  of  Rebels,  but  all  the  slaves  of  loyal  owners,  then 
come  to  the  promise  of  freedom  soon  to  be  consummated.  The 
proclamation  of  the  President  was  much  wider  than  either 
of  the  bills. 

Some  members  of  the  Senate  doubted  the  power  of  Congress 
to  interfere  with  slavery.  They  argued  that  it  was  a  local  in 
stitution  created  and  maintained  by  the  laws  of  the  States 
wherein  it  existed  and  that  only  those  States  had  power  over 
it.  They  insisted  that  Congress  could  only  punish  the  offenders 
in  rebellion  as  other  criminals  are  punished,  according  to  law; 
that  such  a  bill  as  this  was  an  ex  post  facto  law,  and  that  like 
a  bill  of  attainder,  it  inflicted  punishment,  without  conviction 
by  due  process  of  law,  all  of  which  was  forbidden  by  the  Con 
stitution. 

Sumner  scouted  such  arguments.  He  felt  impatient  at  the 
course  of  such  debate,  standing  face  to  face  with  enemies  strik 
ing  at  the  life  of  the  Republic  and  yet  in  dealing  with  them 
to  be  subjected  to  all  the  embarrassments  of  criminal  proceed 
ings.  "  People/'  he  said,  "  talked  flippantly  of  the  gallows  as 
the  certain  doom  of  the  Rebels.  This  is  a  mistake.  For  weal 
or  woe,  the  gallows  is  out  of  the  question.  It  is  not  possible  as 
a  punishment  for  this  rebellion."  He  insisted  that  we  were  in 
the  midst  of  rebellion  as  well  as  in  the  midst  of  war  and  that 
as  a  consequence  we  had  a  right  to  treat  the  offenders  as  crimi 
nals  or  as  public  enemies  and  to  choose  for  ourselves  whichever 
method  of  punishment  we  preferred ;  that  the  power  to  do  this 
was  ample,  allowed  both  by  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  of 
war.  He  showed  that  confiscation  had  always  been  an  instru 
ment  of  government  both  in  punishment  for  crime  and  in  war. 
After  reviewing  foreign  examples  of  ancient  and  modern  times, 
he  collected  the  statutes,  eighty-eight  in  number,  which  had 
been  passed  by  the  colonies,  punishing,  by  confiscation  of  prop 
erty,  the  Tories,  who  had  adhered  to  the  King  of  England,  dur 
ing  the  Revolutionary  War.  He  arranged  them  under  the  heads 
of  the  respective  colonies  so  as  to  show  that  the  Southern  people 
themselves  as  well  as  the  Northern  did  not  hesitate  during  the 
Revolutionary  War  to  employ  all  the  acknowledged  rights  of 
war  against  their  fellow  citizens  who  were  acting  as  public  ene 
mies.  He  showed  also  that  the  Commissioners  Adams,  Franklin 
and  Jay,  refused,  in  the  negotiations  with  England  for  the 
acknowledgment  of  National  Independence,  to  either  restore  the 
property  thus  confiscated  or  to  pay  for  it. 

Closing  his  speech,  on  this  subject,  on  the  nineteenth  of  May, 
1862,  Sumner  said :  "  God,  in  His  beneficence,  offers  to  na- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  441 

tions,  as  to  individuals,  opportunity,  opportunity,  OPPORTUNITY, 
which,  of  all  things,  is  most  to  be  desired.  Never  before,  in 
history,  has  he  offered  such  as  is  ours  here.  Do  not  fail  to 
seize  it.  *  *  *  If  you  seek  Indemnity  for  the  Past  and  Security 
for  the  Future,  if  you  seek  the  national  unity  under  the  Con 
stitution  of  the  United  States  here  is  the  way.  Strike  down 
the  leaders  of  the  Rebellion,  and  lift  up  the  slaves." 

Little  profit  as  there  seemed  to  be,  on  first  impression,  in  all 
this  discussion,  to  secure  the  passage  of  a  bill,  that  was  soon  to 
be  supplanted,  by  the  wider  proclamation  of  the  President,  still 
I  am  not  disposed  to  think  the  discussion  was  as  fruitless  as  it 
appeared.  We  must  remember  that  slavery  was  the  cause  of 
the  war  and,  in  the  light  of  all  the  past,  we  could  hope  for  no 
permanent  peace,  without  its  destruction.  But  emancipation 
was  not  practicable,  at  the  beginning  of  the  war.  The  country 
was  not  prepared  for  it.  Aggressive  anti-slavery  men,  like 
Sumner,  were  thoroughly  convinced  of  its-  necessity.  But  the 
South  was  a  unit  against  it,  and  half  of  the  North  was  of  the 
same  way  of  thinking.  It  remained  for  the  North  to  be  edu 
cated  upon  this  question.  More  than  any  other  means  to  this 
end  was  the  long  discussion  of  the  question,  in  Congress,  during 
this  session.  From  Washington,  it  widened  out,  through  the 
press  and  public  discussion,  until  a  great  change,  in  public  senti 
ment,  was  wrought.  Sumner  spoke,  earnestly  and  often,  dur 
ing  the  session,  upon  the  question,  but  his  principal  speech  was 
delivered,  on  May  nineteenth.  This  speech  was  republished, 
under  the  title  of  "  Rights  of  Sovereignty  and  Rights  of  War," 
by  the  Young  Men's  Republican  Union  of  New  York  City,  and 
gained  a  considerable  circulation.  He  spoke  again,  on  the 
question,  June  twenty-seventh,  and  his  speech  this  time  was 
published,  at  length,  in  the  New  York  Independent.  In  pref 
acing  it  the  Independent  declared  it  to  be  "the  most  com 
plete  presentation  of  the  question,  that  could  be  found,  within 
the  same  compass,  and,  like  all  Mr.  Sumner's  speeches,  dis 
tinguished  for  accuracy  of  statement,  learning  and  sound  prin 
ciple." 

Sumner's  labors  for  emancipation  at  this  session  had  been 
herculean.  He  was  as  thoroughly  convinced,  as  could  be,  that 
the  long  hoped-for  "  opportunity "  had  arrived  and,  for  the 
good  of  the  country,  as  well  as  humanity,  should  not  be  al 
lowed  to  escape  unembraced.  Of  course  his  persistency,  in 
pressing  emancipation,  was  resented,  by  the  few  pro-slavery 
members,  remaining  in  the  Senate.  They  felt  that  the  colored 
people  were  occupying  too  much  of  the  attention  of  Congress. 

Garrett  Davis  of  Kentucky,  one  day,  when  Sumner  was  seek- 


442  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

ing  the  amendment  of  a  bill,  relating  to  the  judiciary,  so  as  to 
forbid  the  exclusion  of  witnesses,  in  the  United  States  courts, 
on  account  of  color,  rather  petulantly  remarked :  "  I  do  not 
think,  Mr.  President,  there  was  any  need  for  sticking  the  per 
petual,  the  all-pervading,  the  every- where-to-be-found,  the  ever- 
in-the-way  negro  to  this  bill.  I  hope  and  trust  that  the  Senate 
and  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  will  be  allowed  to  ma 
ture  and  perfect  some  new  bills,  in  which  the  interests  and  the 
business  of  the  white  men  are  involved,  without  having  this 
ever-present  negro  stuck  upon  them,  by  the  Senator  from  Mass 
achusetts.  If  he  desires  to  bring  up  this  matter  of  the  negro, 
in  connection  with  the  rules  of  proceeding  in  the  Federal  courts, 
let  him  introduce  a  distinct  bill,  and  not  make  everything 
odoriferous  of  his  friend/' 

The  amendment  was  rejected.  But  Sumner  renewed  his  mo 
tion,  in  the  form  of  a  proviso.  The  Senate  adjourned  and  the 
bill  was  never  taken  up  again.  But  a  few  days  later,  the  Senate 
having  under  consideration  another  bill,  Sumner  offered  his 
amendment  again.  It  was  rejected  again.  But  Sumner  re 
newed  it,  at  the  next  session ;  and  finally  it  passed. 

This,  in  brief,  was  the  history  of  this  bill,  but  not  of  this  bill 
alone.  It  was  the  history  of  many  of  the  measures,  that  Sum 
ner  advocated.  They  oftentimes  did  not  triumph,  when  he  first 
presented  and  first  advocated  them.  But  his  persistency  in 
a  good  cause,  has  been  seldom  equalled.  If  defeated  once, 
he  only  renewed  the  struggle  again,  in  a  different  form,  and,  if 
ncessary,  again,  and  again.  His  persistency  was  one  of  the 
marked  traits  of  his  character. 

But  often,  his  thorough  investigation  of  a  question,  led  to  its 
prompt  determination.  This  was  illustrated,  on  more  than 
one  occasion  at  this  session.  On  the  seventh  of  July,  a  bill 
was  before  the  Senate,  to  establish  provisional  governments  for 
the  States  in  rebellion.  This  was  reported  to  the  Senate  with 
certain  amendments,  one  of  which  recognized  the  laws  of  the 
State  before  rebellion,  and  provided  for  their  continued  en 
forcements,  under  the  new  government.  Sumner  opposed  this 
amendment,  recognizing  these  laws.  He  read,  from  the  statutes 
of  North  Carolina,  one,  which  provided,  that  any  free  person 
teaching  a  slave  to  read  or  write,  or  giving  a  slave  a  book  or 
pamphlet  should,  if  white,  be  fined,  not  more  than  two  hun 
dred  dollars,  or  imprisoned  and,  if  colored,  should  be  fined,  or 
imprisoned,  or  whipped;  another  statute,  forbidding  a  slave  to 
teach  another  slave  or  free  negro,  to  read  or  write ;  another  for 
bidding  a  person  to  circulate  or  publish  in  the  State  anything 
calculated  to  cause  slaves  to  be  dissatisfied  with  their  condi- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  443 

tion  or  stir  them  up  to  conspiracies  or  insurrections,  under 
penalty  of  imprisonment,  for  a  year,  for  the  first  offence,  and 
of  death,  for  the  second;  another,  forbidding  a  free  negro  to 
preach,  in  public,  or  officiate,  at  a  prayer-meeting,  where  slaves 
of  different  families  are  collected,  under  penalty  of  receiving 
thirty-nine  lashes  on  his  bare  back.  The  bill  was  allowed  to 
drop,  one  of  the  members  of  the  committee,  who  had  united  in 
reporting  it,  declaring  that  he  himself  was  against  it  and  would 
never  vote  for  a  law  that  sanctioned  the  punishment  of  a  man 
"  for  teaching  another  to  read  the  word  of  God." 

With  like  ease,  by  a  visit  to  the  President,  and  a  call  for  docu 
ments,  by  resolution,  in  the  Senate,  Sumner  stopped  the  pro 
visional  Governor  of  North  Carolina,  from  closing  up  the  col 
ored  schools  of  that  State,  under  laws  in  force  prior  to  rebel 
lion.  The  sweeping  order  of  the  War  Department,  to  the 
Governor,  directed  the  enforcement  of  these  laws.  The  teacher 
of  one  of  the  schools  thus  closed,  came  on  to  Washington,  and 
presented  the  matter  to  Sumner  and  asked  his  interference  to 
stop  such  proceedings.  Sumner  at  once  sought  the  President, 
at  the  White  House,  and,  not  finding  him  there,  followed  him 
to  the  War  Department.  Upon  Sumner  making  known  to  him 
the  purpose  of  his  visit,  the  President  asked  him,  with  some 
impatience ;  "  Do  you  take  me  for  a  School  Committeeman  ?  " 
"  Not  at  all,"  answered  Sumner,  "  I  take  you  for  the  President 
and  I  come  to  you  with  a  grievance  that  George  Washington 
would  have  added  to  his  renown,  in  correcting."  The  President 
stopped  and  heard  him  patiently  and  the  matter  was  corrected. 
Sumner,  in  relating  it  afterwards,  said  this  was  the  only  time 
he  was  ever  treated  impatiently  by  Lincoln. 

Other  things  of  grave  importance  were  pressing  upon  the 
President,  in  his  still  new  and  untried  position.  A  large  army 
was  already  in  the  field  and  the  expenses  of  the  Government 
were  multiplying  with  fearful  rapidity.  The  conduct  of  the 
war  was  absorbing  the  interest  as  well  as  the  energy  of  the 
Administration.  It  is  not  difficult  to  realize  that  smaller  mat 
ters,  of  detail,  that  had  to  come  to  the  President's  attention,  at 
times,  seemed  more  than  he  could  bear. 

The  revenue  bills  received  Sumner's  careful  consideration. 
Sumner  voted  steadily  in  favor  of  the  proposition,  much  dis 
cussed  and  often  before  the  Senate  at  this  session,  to  make 
Treasury  notes  a  legal  tender,  in  payment  of  all  dues,  public 
and  private,  except  for  interest  on  bonds.  In  effect,  it  amounted 
to  a  forced  loan  to  the  Government.  He  spoke  at  length,  in 
the  Senate,  in  its  favor.  Others  argued  against  its  constitu 
tionality,  but  he  insisted  that  the  Constitution  expressly  gave 


444  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to  Congress  the  power  to  issue  bills  of  credit  and  that  this 
grant,  of  necessity,  carried  with  it  the  power  to  make  them  a 
legal  tender.  He  showed  that,  in  times  of  exigency,  such  bills 
had  been  issued  by  Great  Britain  and  the  Colonies.  But,  while 
granting  the  power  and  admitting  the  necessity  for  the  exercise 
of  it,  on  the  present  exigency  of  the  country,  he  warned  Con 
gress  against  the  dangers  of  an  irredeemable  paper  currency. 

In  the  consideration  of  the  Internal  Tax  Bill,  Sumner  moved 
an  amendment  for  a  tax  of  Ten  Dollars  on  each  slave  owned,  to 
be  paid  by  his  master.  It  was  argued  that  such  a  tax  would 
give  sanction  to  property  in  man;  but  Sumner  answered  that 
slavery  was  an  intolerable  nuisance  entrenched  in  State  lines, 
that  we  would  not  treat  it  otherwise  than  as  a  nuisance  when 
we  taxed  it.  In  taxing  it  we  did  not  assume  its  rightfulness, 
but  its  existence.  Taxation  instead  of  being  an  encouragement 
of  it  would  discourage  it.  But  out  of  tenderness,  to  the  slave 
owners,  in  the  border  states,  not  in  rebellion,  Sumner's  motion 
failed. 

Sumner  opposed  a  tax  upon  cotton.  In  the  first  consideration 
of  the  bill,  he  procured  the  tax  of  a  cent  a  pound  on  it  to  be 
stricken  out.  But  when  the  bill  as  thus  amended  went  back 
to  the  House  this  tax  was  inserted  again  and  when  returned 
to  the  Senate,  he  procured  it  to  be  reduced  to  one  half  cent  a 
pound.  He  felt  such  tax  was  unjust  to  the  South,  agricultural 
products  of  the  North  not  being  taxed;  and  likewise  that  it 
bore  hard  upon  the  manufacturers  of  cotton  goods.  Sumner 
also  opposed  an  increase  of  the  tax  upon  books  imported  into 
the  country,  as  being  a  tax  upon  knowledge. 

In  the  consideration  of  such  measures  the  session  of  Congress 
wore  away.  It  closed  on  July  seventeenth,  1862.  It  had  been 
an  unusual  one, — unusual  for  the  ne,w  and  unheard  of  questions 
it  was  called  upon  to  dispose  of,  and  unusual,  as  well,  for  the 
character  of  the  work  it  accomplished.  Sumner  said  of  it  on 
June  twenty-seventh: 

"  The  present  Congress  has  already  done  much  beyond  any 
other  Congress  in  our  history.  Measures  which  for  long  years 
seemed  unattainable  only  to  the  most  sanguine  hope,  have 
triumphed.  Emancipation  in  the  national  Capitol;  freedom 
in  all  the  national  Territories;  the  offer  of  ransom  to  help 
emancipation  in  the  States;  the  recognition  of  Haiti  and  Li 
beria  ;  the  treaty  with  Great  Britain  for  the  suppression  of  the 
slave-trade ;  the  prohibition  of  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves  by 
military  officers;  homesteads  for  actual  settlers  on  the  public 
lands ;  a  Pacific  railroad ;  endowment  of  agricultural  colleges 
out  of  the  public  lands ;  such  are  some  of  the  achievements  by 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  445 

which  the  present  Congress  is  already  historic.  There  have  been 
victories  of  war,  won  on  hard-fought  fields,  but  none  comparable 
to  the  victories  of  peace.  Besides  these  measures  of  unmixed 
beneficence,  the  present  Congress  has  created  an  immense  army 
and  a  considerable  navy,  and  has  provided  the  means  for  all 
our  gigantic  expenditures  by  a  tax  which  in  itself  is  an  epoch." 
When  it  was  drawing  to  its  close,  Sumner  declared  he  had  not 
been  out  of  his  seat  a  half  hour  since  the  session  began.  But 
when  the  motion  was  made,  fixing  the  time  of  adjournment,  he 
spoke  against  it.  He  was  tired,  as  well  as  the  others,  and  wished 
to  be  away,  but  he  could  not  agree  to  go  and  leave  so  much 
important  business  undisposed  of.  The  admission  of  West 
Virginia,  as  a  separate  State,  was  pressing;  Congress  was  called 
upon  to  provide  provisional  governments  for  the  States  in  rebel 
lion;  and  above  all  the  Army  Bill  required  prompt  attention. 
This  and  Executive  business  should  be  finished,  he  thought, 
before  the  adjournment.  But  the  majority  voted  otherwise. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 

THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1862 SUMNER?S    THIRD   ELECTION   TO    THE 

SENATE SESSION      1862-3 ADVOCATES      ENLISTMENT      OF 

COLORED    TROOPS — COMPENSATED    EMANCIPATION    IN    MIS 
SOURI 

THE  sands  of  Sumner's  second  term  were  fast  running  out. 
The  election  of  members  of  the  State  Legislature,  who  were  to 
make  a  choice  of  his  successor,  was  to  take  place  in  November, 
1862.  For  the  only  time  after  he  entered  the  Senate,  an  or 
ganized  effort  was  made,  to  defeat  him.  It  had  been  in  prog 
ress  for  a  year.  It  first  made  its  appearance,  on  the  occasion 
already  alluded  to,  when  Sumner,  in  1861,  made  his  speech, 
before  the  State  Republican  Convention  of  Massachusetts,  ad 
vocating  emancipation,  as  our  best  weapon,  against  rebellion. 
The  charge  persistently  made  against  him  was,  that  he  was  too 
extreme,  in  his  advocacy  of  the  rights  of  the  colored  people, 
that  he  was  aggravating  the  situation  of  the  nation  and  pro 
longing  the  war,  by  goading  the  slave-owners  into  more  des 
perate  efforts  to  destroy  the  Union.  It  was  charged  that  he  was 
second  only  to  Jefferson  Davis,  in  the  work  of  destruction  of  the 
Union  and  his  defeat  was  urged  as  necessary,  if  the  country 
was  to  be  saved.  It  was  said,  that  the  last  session  of  Congress 
had  been  consumed  with  measures,  for  the  relief  of  colored 
people,  while  the  rights  of  our  white  citizens  were  neglected. 

This  opposition  to  Sumner  served  the  purpose  of  arousing 
his  friends  to  activity.  No  man  perhaps  ever  lived,  in  Mass 
achusetts,  who  had  so  many  friends,  among  intelligent  men,  of 
all  classes.  Among  them  were  such  people  as  editors  of  country 
newspapers,  teachers  and  ministers,  the  members  of  the  old 
abolition  parties,  scholars  and  writers,  who  cared  nothing  for 
office,  for  themselves.  Many  of  them  had  been  associated  with 
him,  in  the  early  anti-slavery  days,  and  had  ever  since  kept  pace 
with  the  work ;  others  had  been  converted  to  these  views  by  later 
events;  most  of  them  had  followed  his  course,  in  the  Senate, 
with  interest  and  many  of  them  had  been  readers  of  his 
speeches.  Such  men  made  a  powerful  following  for  any  states 
man,  when  they  were  once  thoroughly  aroused.  Events  now 
happening  were  sufficient  to  awaken  a  watchfulness,  in  every 
lover  of  his  country.  It  was  a  time  of  intense  interest,  even 

446 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  447 

bitterness,  of  political  opinions.  These  friends  were  not  willing 
to  see  Sumner  defeated,  without  an  effort.  The  attempt  to  do 
this  aroused,  to  activity,  an  element  hardly  known  to  exist,  in 
its  intensity,  till  the  occasion  for  it  appeared. 

A  fight  had  also  been  made,  early  in  the  summer,  to  defeat 
the  renomination  of  John  A.  Andrew  for  Governor,  on  much 
the  same  ground  as  had  been  taken  against  Sumner.  The  Ke- 
publican  State  Convention  met  at  Worcester,  on  September 
tenth.  Andrew  was  renominated,  by  acclamation.  J.  Q.  A. 
Griffin  of  Charlestown  introduced  two  resolutions,  one  pro 
posing  the  extermination  of  slavery  and  another  approving  the 
course  of  the  two  Senators  and  "  commending  Sumner  to  the 
suffrages  of  his  fellow  citizens,  whom  he  had  served  so  well, 
that  the  Commonwealth  might  again  honor  itself,  by  returning 
to  duty,  at  the  Capitol,  a  statesman,  a  scholar,  a  patriot,  and  a 
man,  of  whom  any  republic,  in  any  age,  might  be  proud." 
These  were  strong  words  of  indorsement.  Certainly  too  strong 
to  suit  the  taste  of  men,  who  were  prepared  to  compass  his 
defeat.  Griffin  had  been  chosen  to  lead  the  Sumner  forces,  on 
the  floor  of  the  convention.  He  was  a  young  man,  thirty-six 
years  of  age,  but  of  rare  ability  to  catch  the  current  of  a  popu 
lar  convention  and  to  lead  its  deliberations, — an  able  speaker 
and  an  enthusiastic  worker.  The  opposition  to  Sumner  was 
led,  by  E.  H.  Dana,  Jr.,  then  United  States  District  Attorney, 
whose  appointment  Sumner  had  furthered  and,  with  whose 
family,  he  had  always  sustained  relations  of  friendship.  Dana 
moved  as  a  substitute  a  resolution  simply  indorsing  the  course 
of  the  Administration  in  the  prosecution  of  the  war ;  and  sup 
ported  his  substitute,  by  a  speech  deprecating  the  anticipation 
of  the  work  of  the  Legislature,  whose  duty  it  was  to  choose 
Sumner's  successor.  Griffin  followed  him,  in  a  trenchant  speech, 
in  which  Dana  was  roughly  used.  Others  followed,  in  the  same 
vein.  Griffin's  resolutions  were  referred  to  a  committee,  where 
Dana  again  opposed  them.  But  the  committee  reported  them, 
to  the  convention.  Here  a  motion  to  amend,  by  striking  out 
the  indorsement  of  Sumner,  was  made.  But  it  was  voted  down ; 
and  then  the  resolutions  as  reported  by  the  committee  indorsing 
Sumner  were  unanimously  adopted.  With  this,  the  effort, 
within  the  party,  to  defeat  Sumner  ended. 

But  as  Horace  Greeley  expressed  it,  the  bitterness,  with  which 
Sumner  was  hated,  insisted  on  having  the  gratification  of  a  can 
vass,  even  though  a  hopeless  one  and,  "  since  there  was  no  exist 
ing  party,  by  which  this  could  be  attempted,  without  manifest 
futility,  one  was  organized  for  the  purpose."  The  two  distinct 
issues  presented,  by  the  resolutions,  were,  the  extermination  of 


448  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

slavery,  and  the  re-election  of  Sumner.  The  party,  committed 
to  the  re-election  of  Sumner,  was  of  necessity  committed  to  the 
extermination  of  slavery.  Sumner,  more  than  a  year  before, 
had  committed  himself  to  emancipation  and  had  now  by  hard 
fighting  brought  his  party,  in  the  State,  up  to  the  same  position 
and  both  were  now  firmly  committed,  by  the  platform.  Mas 
sachusetts  never  receded  from  it.  In  the  last  months  of  his 
life,  looking  back  over  his  career,  meditating  on  life  and  its 
hardships  and  the  inconstancy  of  men,  Sumner  consoled  him 
self,  with  this  thought ;  "  There  is  one  satisfaction  which  can 
not  be  taken  from  me,"  he  wrote.  "  I  have  tried  to  do  my  duty 
and  to  advance  humanity,  keeping  Massachusetts  foremost  in 
what  is  just  and  magnanimous.  When  I  am  dead  this  will  not 
be  denied/'  And  could  he  not  have  uttered  that  sentiment  at 
the  close  of  this  Republican  Convention  ?  Only  twelve  months 
before  he  had  pleaded  earnestly,  before  these  Republicans,  for 
emancipation,  as  the  best  weapon.  But  in  vain !  The  Con 
vention  would  adopt  no  such  resolution.  Sumner  went  to  the 
people  with  his  plea  and  labored  on  and  he  convinced  them. 
Now  the  Convention  had  advanced  to  his  position  and  in 
dorsed  it  and  indorsed  him.  But  the  Nation  had  not  yet  ad 
vanced  that  far.  He  was  "  keeping  Massachusetts  foremost." 

The  Democratic  party  had  fared  so  badly,  in  the  recent  elec 
tions  in  Massachusetts,  that  opposition  by  it  would  be  a  con 
fession  of  defeat.  It  was  hoped  elements  could  be  induced  to 
join  a  new  organization,  that  could  not  be  induced  to  join  the 
Democrats  and  that,  all  the  opposition  being  united,  there  would 
be  a  hope  of  success.  The  movers  were  opposed  to  emancipa 
tion,  but  they  were  much  more  opposed  to  the  re-election  of 
Sumner ;  and  it  was  the  latter  they  especially  wished  to  defeat. 
The  various  elements  of  opposition  to  Sumner  and  emancipa 
tion  crystallized,  in  a  call  for  a  "  People's  Convention/7  to  be 
held  in  Faneuil  Hall,  Boston,  on  October  seventh. 

But  before  this  convention  could  be  held,  other  events  had 
happened  which  placed  a  different  aspect,  on  the  situation. 
On  the  seventeenth  of  September,  the  bloody  battle  of  Antietam 
was  fought.  The  Northern  armies  remained  in  possession  of 
the  field,  and  claimed  the  victory.  President  Lincoln  had  been 
meditating  emancipation  and  had  prepared  a  draft  of  his  Proc 
lamation.  He  had  been  repeatedly  urged  to  issue  such  a  proc 
lamation,  but  had  never  been  brought  to  believe  that  the  time 
had  come.  Just  when  he  came  to  the  determination,  in  his 
own  mind,  that  he  would  issue  it,  is  uncertain.  But  he  did  not 
wish  to  issue  it,  while  the  fortunes  of  the  war  appeared  against 
us.  In  homely,  but  vigorous  English,  he  has  himself  described 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER  449 

how  at  last  he  came  to  issue  it  when  he  did :  "  When  Lee  came 
over  the  Potomac,"  he  said,  "  I  made  a  resolve  that,  if  Mc- 
Clellan  drove  him  back,  I  would  send  the  proclamation  after 
him.  The  battle  of  Antietam  was  fought  Wednesday,  but  I 
could  not  find  out  till  Saturday,  whether  we  had  won  a  victory 
or  lost  a  battle.  It  was  then  too  late  to  issue  it  that  day,  and 
on  Sunday  I  fixed  it  up  a  little,  and  on  Monday  I  let  them 
have  it." 

At  last,  Sumner  and  Massachusetts  and  the  President  were 
in  harmony,  upon  the  great  question  of  emancipation.  And 
though  the  Proclamation  did  not  come  as  Sumner  wished,  it 
can  fairly  be  said,  it  came,  as  soon  as  the  country  was  prepared 
for  it.  He  was  right  when  he  insisted  that  slavery  was  wrong 
and  should  be  abolished;  but  it  was  a  monster  evil  that  had 
grown,  with  the  growth  of  the  country,  until  it  had  reached 
mammoth  proportions  and  could  not  carelessly  at  any  mo 
ment  be  plucked  up  by  the  roots.  Sumner's  great  agitation  of 
the  question  was  the  work  of  a  reformer  and  it  bore  the  fruit 
of  substantial  and  permanent  success,  when  at  last  it  was 
gathered. 

While  he  watched  Sumner  cultivating  it,  Lincoln  had  been 
carefully  looking  for  the  harvest  time.  He  saw  the  tide  had 
been  setting  against  him,  because  emancipation  was  not  de 
clared.  In  1861,  the  line  of  party  had  been  almost  wiped  out, 
in  the  determination  of  loyal  people,  both  Democrats  and  Re 
publicans,  to  support  the  war  for  the  Union.  This  year  a 
large  number  of  Members  of  Congress  were  to  be  elected  and  it 
was  vital,  for  the  Administration,  to  have  the  Republican  ma 
jority  of  the  House  maintained.  Congress  controlled  the  ap 
propriations  and,  by  withholding  money  necessary  for  the  prose 
cution  of  the  war,  could  dictate,  in  large  measure,  the  policy  of 
the  Administration.  The  Democratic  Conventions  of  Ohio, 
Pennsylvania,  Indiana  and  Illinois  had  declared  against  the 
policy  of  the  Republicans  for  emancipation  and  demanded  that 
the  war  be  conducted  for  the  preservation  of  the  Union  alone. 
They  declared  that  a  war  for  the  abolition  of  slavery  could  not 
have  their  support.  The  Democrats  of  other  States  followed 
their 'lead,  as  bitter  in  fact,  but  more  diplomatic  in  expression. 
They  were  entering  into  the  campaign,  with  a  will,  and  with 
many  promises  of  success  before  them.  The  anti-slavery  work 
of  Congress  had  gone  far  enough  to  arouse  the  bitter  hostility 
of  Democrats,  who  were  not  committed  to  the  prosecution  of 
the  war,  but  not  far  enough  to  deal  an  effective  blow  against 
slavery;  far  enough  to  awaken  every  element  of  bitter  opposi 
tion  North  and  South,  but  not  far  enough  to  awaken  any  en- 


450  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

thusiasm  among  Republicans.  The  Administration  had  so 
far  only  pursued  a  partial  policy,  where  it  was  exposed  to  all 
the  dangers  of  a  reaction  of  public  opinion.  Lincoln  was 
too  clear  sighted  a  politician  not  to  appreciate  the  dangers  of 
such  a  position.  He  determined  to  lay  before  the  people  the 
choice  between  Union  and  slavery  and  place  them  where  voters 
would  be  persuaded  that  both  could  not  survive,  that  one  or 
the  other  must  perish.  With  a  great  cause  to  work  for,  and  a 
battle  cry  worthy  of  the  struggle  they  were  compelled  to  make, 
Republicans  would  be  encouraged  to  work. 

The  proclamation  was  issued  two  weeks  before  the  date  fixed 
"  for  the  People's  Convention/'  The  Republicans,  now 
thoroughly  aroused  to  the  situation  and  convinced  of  the  im 
portance  of  the  return  of  Sumner  to  the  Senate,  urged  him  to 
take  the  stump.  This  he  did,  speaking  in  a  dozen  or  more 
places  in  the  State,  during  the  campaign.  A  meeting  was 
arranged  for  Faneuil  Hall,  Boston,  at  noon  of  October  sixth, 
the  day  before  the  convention  of  the  "  People's  "  party,  called 
to  be  held  at  the  same  place.  The  hour  of  Sumner's  meeting 
was  fixed  at  noon,  so  as  to  secure  the  attendance  of  the  business 
men  of  the  city.  The  hall  was  filled  to  overflowing. 

Referring  to  the  criticisms  that  had  been  made  of  him,  for  his 
policy  of  emancipation,  he  said  that  they  had  now  become  of 
little  consequence,  for  even  if  he  was  once  alone,  he  was  no 
longer  so ;  for  with  him  were  now  arrayed  the  loyal  multitudes 
of  the  North,  and  that  they  were  all  on  the  side  of  the  Presi 
dent.  If  he  were  criticised  once,  for  being  hostile  to  the  Admin 
istration,  he  could  be  no  longer,  for  the  President  had  pro 
claimed  emancipation.  To  criticise  him,  therefore,  and  the 
platform  of  his  party,  in  Massachusetts,  was  now  to  criticise  the 
Administration ;  for  they  all  stood  together. 

He  insisted  that  the  real  object  of  the  war  was  not  to  abolish 
slavery,  nor  to  restore  the  Constitution  as  it  was;  but  to  put 
down  the  Rebellion,  that  there  could  be  no  separation  of  the 
States,  that  such  an  event  would  bring  interminable  chaos.  If 
these  States  were  allowed  to  go,  what  could  be  retained  ?  Who 
would  control  the  Mississippi  River?  How  could  we  tolerate 
on  our  borders  a  malignant  slave  empire  ?  We  must  study  the 
disease  and  its  cause  and  apply  the  cure,  not  hesitatingly,  but 
vigorously.  The  emancipation  proclaimed  by  the  President  was 
a  war  measure  adopted  by  him,  as  Commander-in-Chief  of  the 
armies,  for  the  suppression  of  armed  public  enemies. 

Without  emancipation,  all  our  efforts  would  be  in  vain.  It 
was  not  enough  to  beat  armies.  Rebel  communities  envenomed 
against  the  Union  would  have  to  be  restored  and  the  South 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  451 

quieted.  This  could  only  be  done,  by  removing  the  disturbing 
cause.  Slavery  was  the  disease  and  it  must  be  extirpated  by 
the  knife  and  by  fire,  so  -that  the  healthful  operations  of  the 
national  life  could  be  regained.  This  could  not  be  accom 
plished  by  force  alone.  A  people  defeated,  on  the  battlefield 
alone,  will  remain  sullen  and  revengeful,  ready  for  another 
rebellion.  To  trample  down  the  Eebellion,  you  must  trample 
down  slavery.  To  end  the  war  otherwise,  is  to  end  it  in  appear 
ance  only,  not  in  reality.  "  Time  will  be  gained  for  new 
efforts,  and  slavery  will  coil  itself  to  spring  again." 

Emancipation  was  the  right  of  the  slaves  and  we  could 
not  expect  the  favor  of  a  just  God  upon  us  while  we  did  wrong 
by  refusing  them  freedom.  Having  now  been  proclaimed  as  a 
war  measure,  it  should  be  sustained,  as  the  army,  in  the  field,  is 
sustained.  If  we  did  this,  European  nations  could  no  longer 
be  deluded  into  believing  that  slavery  had  nothing  to  do  with 
the  war.  It  could  no  longer  be  said  that  it  was  a  war  for  em 
pire  on  one  side  and  for  independence  upon  the  other,  and  that 
all  generous  ideas  were  on  the  side  of  Eebellion.  With  emanci 
pation  before  us,  there  would  be  no  longer  talk  that  separation 
was  inevitable  and  we  were  doomed  to  dismemberment.  We 
would  only  be  fulfilling  the  wishes  of  our  fathers,  the  rights  of 
human  nature  and  the  declared  object  of  our  Eevolution.  On 
such  an  issue,  there  could  be  but  two  parties,  the  one  for 
the  country,  with  Lincoln,  and  the  other  against  it,  with  Davis. 

Eesolutions  sustaining  emancipation  were  read  and  adopted, 
at  the  meeting,  with  great  enthusiasm. 

On  the  next  day,  October  seventh,  the  "  People's  Conven 
tion  "  met,  in  the  same  Hall.  It  nominated  Charles  Devens 
for  Governor  and  candidates  against  the  others,  of  the  Eepub- 
licans.  The  day  after  this,  October  eighth,  the  Democratic 
Convention  met  at  Worcester  and  indorsed  these  nominations 
of  the  "  People's  Convention."  The  issue  was  thus  made  up 
on  the  emancipation  policy  of  the  Administration  and  the 
re-election  of  Sumner. 

Sumner  was  very  active  during  the  campaign,  speaking  at 
numerous  places,  in  Massachusetts;  at  Salem,  at  Springfield, 
where  the  Springfield  Eepublican  was  opposing  his  re-election, 
and  at  the  dinner  of  Hampshire  County  Agricultural  Society, 
at  Northampton,  the  only  time  he  ever  spoke  at  a  county  fair. 
He  was  introduced  to  the  Society  by  Erastus  Hopkins,  his  class 
mate  at  the  Boston  Latin  School,  who  described  him  as  he 
appeared  forty  years  before:  "  in  height  and  in  breadth  as  well 
as  in  diligence  and  scholarship,  first  among  equals." 

Such  men  as  John  G.  Whittier,  Horace  Greeley  and  Wendell 


452  L1FE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Phillips  took  part  in  the  campaign  for  Sumner.  Wendell  Phil 
lips  declared  that  he  was  "  the  hardest  worker  Massachusetts 
had  ever  sent  to  the  Senate, — patient  in  labor,  untiring  in  effort, 
boundless  in  resources,  terribly  in  earnest, — the  only  man  who, 
in  civil  affairs,  was  to  be  compared  to  the  great  terror  of  the 
Union  armies,  Stonewall  Jackson,  both  idealogists,  both  horsed 
on  an  idea,  and  both  men  whom,  a  year  before,  the  drudges  of 
State  Street  would  have  denounced  as  unpractical  and  im 
practicable."  The  result  of  the  campaign,  at  home,  was  all 
that  Sumner  could  wish.  In  entire  harmony  among  themselves, 
and  with  the  Administration,  having  a  great  stake  to  play  for, 
the  Republicans  were  successful.  They  carried  Massachusetts 
by  more  than  27,000  majority. 

The  result  in  other  States  was  disheartening.  New  York 
and  New  Jersey  elected  Democratic  Governors.  The  President's 
own  State,  Illinois,  sent  a  Democratic  Senator  to  Washington. 
In  Ohio,  Indiana  and  Pennsylvania,  the  Democrats  gained 
largely  in  Congressmen.  In  many  other  States,  the  Repub 
licans  won  only  by  reduced  majorities.  These  States  were  not 
prepared  for  emancipation.  Their  statesmen  had  not  been  as 
vigorous  in  public  education,  as  Sumner  was  in  Massachusetts. 

In  this  election,  the  wisdom  of  Lincoln  again  appeared. 
The  losses,  in  these  States,  if  continued  in  the  other  States, 
would  have  left  him  with  a  Democratic  Congress.  But  he 
had  been  tender,  in  all  things,  of  the  rights  of  the  Border  States. 
And,  at  the  last  minute,  these  had  saved  him  this  humiliation. 
There  was  a  decided  gain  in  Congressmen  in  Missouri,  Dela 
ware,  Kentucky,  West  Virginia  and  Maryland.  And  they,  with 
the  New  England  States,  which  stood  firm,  with  California  and 
Oregon ;  and  with  Iowa,  Kansas  and  Minnesota,  that  sent  solid 
Republican  delegations,  gave  their  party  a  majority  in  Con 
gress.  So  that  the  five  slave  States,  which  had  been  saved  to  the 
Union,  by  Lincoln's  care,  were  used  by  him  effectively  in  over 
powering  the  States  in  rebellion. 

On  the  fifteenth  of  January,  1863,  the  Legislature  of  Massa 
chusetts  met  to  choose  Sumner's  successor.  The  two  Houses 
voted  separately.  As  the  roll  was  called,  each  member  pro 
nounced  the  name  of  the  candidate  he  voted  for,  the  result 
showing  that  Sumner  had  two  hundred  and  twenty-seven  votes, 
out  of  the  whole  two  hundred  and  seventy-four,  in  both  Houses. 
In  other  words  he  had  227  votes  and  all  the  other  candidates 
together  had  only  forty-seven.  Josiah  G.  Abbott  had  forty- 
three  of  these  scattering  votes,  while  Caleb  Gushing  and  Charles 
Francis  Adams  each  had  two. 

Sumner  was  in  his  seat,  at  the  opening  of  Congress.     The 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  453 

session  was  destined  to  be  a  short  and  uninteresting  one.  After 
the  work  of  the  preceding  long  and  laborious  session,  and  tne 
campaign  which  followed,  there  was  a  disposition  among  Con 
gressmen  to  wait  and  see  what  would  be  the  results  of  their  own 
work,  already  done,  and  of  the  Proclamation  of  the  President, 
before  reaching  out  farther.  The  adverse  election,  the  Republi 
cans  had  met  with  in  many  States,  was  a  caution  to  them  to  be 
careful. 

Public  interest  was  being  transferred  to  other  scenes.  The 
border  States  were  now  considered  safe  to  the  Union;  the  elec 
tions  there  having  gone  with  the  Republicans,  when  other 
Northern  States  had  not.  The  desperate  battle  of  Stone  River, 
now  remembered  as  the  bloodiest  of  the  whole  war,  considering 
the  numbers  engaged,  convinced  the  Confederacy  that  Ken 
tucky,  at  least,  was  gone  beyond  recovery.  The  tide  of  Southern 
invasion  had  been  rolled  back,  from  Antietam,  with  desperate 
losses  and  Lee's  army,  while  still  threatening  Washington,  was 
confined  within  the  recesses  of  Virginia.  The  Mississippi  River, 
save  for  Vicksburg,  now  invested  with  Grant's  army,  flowed  un- 
vext  to  the  sea,  cutting  off  to  itself  and  from  the  Confederacy 
the  greater  part  of  Louisiana,  as  well  as  Arkansas  and  Texas, 
States  which  had  thus  far  furnished  rich  supplies  to  the  new 
government.  Desperate  battles  had  been  fought  and  great  vic 
tories  had  been  won  by  the  Confederates.  Thus  far  victory 
had  too  seldom  perched  upon  the  banners  of  the  North.  But, 
upon  the  whole,  the  extent  of  the  territory  held  by  the  Con 
federacy  was  materially  reduced  and  its  resources  greatly  cur 
tailed.  But  the  armies  upon  berth  sides  were  gathering  for  the 
death  struggle  and,  the  elections  having  passed,  the  eyes  of  the 
country  as  well  as  of  Congress,  were  turned  upon  them. 

As  early  as  May  26,  1862,  Sumner  had  introduced  a  resolu 
tion  in  the  Senate  declaring  the  time  had  come  to  ask  colored 
men  to  enlist  in  our  armies.  On  the  last  day  of  the  previous 
session,  the  bill  became  a  law,  which  authorized  the  President  to 
receive,  into  the  service  of  the  United  States,  colored  troops  for 
the  purpose  of  performing  camp  service  or  any  other  labor,  or 
military  or  naval  service,  for  which  they  might  be  competent. 
On  the  sixth  of  October,  in  his  speech  in  Faneuil  Hall,  Sumner 
had  again  advocated  the  enlistment  of  colored  soldiers.  On  the 
ninth  of  February,  1863,  he  introduced  a  bill,  providing  for  the 
enrollment,  as  soldiers,  by  the  commanding  officer,  in  whose 
department  they  might  be  found,  of  all  colored  men,  between 
the  ages  of  eighteen  and  forty-five,  made  free,  by  the  laws  passed 
in  1861  and  1862,  to  confiscate  property  used  for  insurrec 
tionary  purposes,  and  to  punish  treason,  by  confiscating  the 


454  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

property  of  rebels,  or  by  the  President's  Proclamation  of  Eman 
cipation.  It  provided  for  the  enlistment  of  not  exceeding  three 
hundred  thousand,  to  be  armed  and  equipped  as  soldiers  and  to 
receive  the  same  rations,  clothing  and  equipments  as  volunteers. 
Such  a  bill  did  not  pass  at  this  session,  but  it  did  become  a  law 
a  year  later.  In  the  meantime,  Secretary  Stanton  had  gone 
forward  and  in  several  instances,  by  an  order  of  the  War  De 
partment,  had  authorized  the  enlistment  of  colored  troops, 
beginning  with  an  order  issued  August  25,  1862. 

A  great  outcry  had  been  made,  in  advance,  by  Southern  \ 
people  and  their  sympathisers,  against  the  employment  of 
colored  troops.  It  was  objected  to,  as  exciting  servile  insurrec 
tion,  as  barbarous  and  in  violation  of  the  rules  of  war.  But 
the  result  justified  the  wisdom  of  the  action.  The  first  colored 
regiment  that  went,  from  Sumner's  State,  was  the  Fifty-fourth 
Massachusetts,  led  by  Colonel  Robert  G.  Shaw,  a  brilliant  young 
white  officer.  The  regiment  was  almost  cut  to  pieces,  in  an  as 
sault  upon  Fort  Wagner,  near  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  on 
the  eighteenth  of  July,  18G3.  Colonel  Shaw  was  shot  on 
the  parapet  of  the  Fort,  and  his  body  was  thrown,  by  the 
Confederates,  into  the  common  trench,  with  those  of  his  dead 
colored  troops. 

Braver  troops  never  entered  the  service,  and  to-day  one  of 
the  most  beautiful  memorials,  in  art,  is  the  bas-relief ,^  by  Au 
gustus  St.  Gaudens,  erected  on  Boston  Common,  in  com 
memoration  of  this  regiment.  It  stands  beneath  the  elm  tree, 
still  living,  under  which  Governor  Andrew  reviewed,  in  May, 
1863,  the  regiment,  as  it  marched  down  Beacon  Street,  opposite 
the  State  House,  on  its  way  to  the  front.  It  represents  the 
young  commander,  beside  his  sturdy  troops  who,  grimly  carry 
ing  their  guns  aloft,  keep  step  to  the  music  that  marches  them 
forth  to  fight  for  their  freedom.  Over  them  all,  in  the  figure, 
floats  the  death  angel,  beckoning  them  on  with  her  right  hand, 
while,  in  the  left,  she  holds  the  palm  and  the  poppies,  emblems 
of  victory  and  death. 

Sumner  took  a  deep  interest  in  the  enlistment  of  this  regi 
ment,  and  in  following  its  fortunes.  He  wrote  to  John  Jay,  of 
New  York,  May,  1863,  that  if  the  Seventh  New  York  Regiment 
would  welcome  this  African  regiment,  as  it  passed  through  that 
city,  it  would  be  an  epoch  as  good  as  a  victory,  and  the  sure 
herald  of  many  victories  and  that  the  Seventh  would  thereby 
contribute  more  to  the  war  than  when  it  hurried  to  Washington, 
at  the  news  of  the  firing  upon  Fort  Sumter.  Two  months  later 
at  the  news  of  their  disaster,  at  Fort  Wagner,  he  wrote  that  he 
could  not  be  consoled  for  the  death  of  Shaw  and  added  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  455 

prediction,  now  fulfilled,  "  That  death  will  be  sacred  in  history 
and  in  art."  Two  years  later,  by  an  article  in  the  Boston  Daily 
Advertiser,  he  started  the  movement  for  the  Shaw  Memorial, 
and  himself  headed  the  committee  to  secure  an  artist  to  execute 
the  work,  and  superintend  its  erection.  To  Sumner  is  given 
the  credit  of  suggesting  the  general  design  of  the  work.  He 
did  not  live  long  enough  to  see  the  monument  completed.  But 
during  the  last  years  of  his  life  he  illustrated  a  debate  on  the 
supplementary  Civil  Eights  Bill  with  these  words: 

"  i  Bury  him  with  his  niggers/  was  the  rude  order  of  the 
Rebel  officer,  as  he  flung  the  precious  remains  of  our  admirable 
Colonel  Shaw,  into  the  common  trench  at  Fort  Wagner,  where 
he  fell,  mounting  the  parapets  at  the  head  of  colored  troops. 
And  so  was  he  buried,  lovely  in  death  as  in  life.  The  intended 
insult  became  an  honor.  In  that  common  trench  the  young 
hero  rests,  symbolizing  the  great  Equality,  for  which  he  died. 
No  Roman  monument,  with  its  Siste,  viator,  to  the  passing 
traveler,  no  '  labor  of  an  age  in  piled  stones,'  can  match  in 
grandeur  that  simple  burial." 

The  behavior  of  these  troops  made  a  deep  impression  at  the 
North  and  did  more  perhaps  than  anything  else  to  convince  the 
public  that  colored  troops  could  fight  well,  in  the  line  of  battle. 
Though  till  now  they  were  sparingly  enlisted,  after  this  their 
employment  went  forward  vigorously.  So  that,  in  the  battle  of 
Nashville  alone,  it  was  estimated  that  twenty-five  per  cent,  of 
the  loss  of  the  Union  army  fell  upon  the  negro  division.  And 
between  1863  and  1865,  one  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  of 
them  enlisted  under  the  Union  flag.  While  the  South  de 
nounced  their  employment,  early  in  the  war,  and  punished  their 
white  officers,  if  taken  prisoners,  with  death,  as  inciters  of  ser 
vile  insurrection ;  before  the  close  of  the  war  the  opinion  of  the 
South  also  changed.  General  Lee  repeatedly  urged  their  enlist 
ment  ;  but  not  till  among  the  very  last  general  orders  was  their 
recruiting  ordered.  It  was  then  too  late  to  help  the  South,  but 
not  to©  late  to  give  emphatic  endorsement  of  the  merit  of  such 
troops. 

During  a  debate  at  this  session  of  Congress  over  a  bill  for  the 
gradual  emancipation  of  the  slaves  of  Missouri,  Sumner  was 
taunted  by  Senator  Powell  of  Kentucky,  with  desiring  these 
negroes  to  be  freed  "  so  that  Governor  Andrew  could  recruit 
there  to  fill  up  the  Massachusetts  quota."  To  which  Sumner 
replied  that  he  "  would  have  a  musket  put  in  the  hands  of  every 
one  of  these  negroes  in  Missouri." 

Notwithstanding  President  Lincoln's  Proclamation,  the  sub 
ject  of  Emancipation  still  continued  an  important  and  difficult 


456  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

question  for  the  solution  of  Congress.  His  Proclamation  only 
emancipated  the  slaves  in  the  States  which  were  in  rebellion. 
But  slavery  still  continued  to  exist  in  the  border  States,  Dela 
ware,  Maryland,  Kentucky,  Missouri  and  Western  Virginia, 
notwithstanding  the  Proclamation  of  Emancipation.  It  was 
proposed  to  free  the  slaves  in  these  States  by  compensating  the 
owners  of  them ;  and  thus  secure  emancipation  in  all  the  States. 

Sumner  was  not  opposed  to  compensated  emancipation.  He 
had  already  voted  for  it  in  the  case  of  the  District  of  Columbia. 
It  was  a  method  of  dealing  with  slavery  in  the  Border  States 
which  President  Lincoln  had  much  at  heart.  But  Sumner  was 
not  greatly  in  favor  of  it ;  and,  indeed,  it  was  not  very  popular 
with  Congress.  This  bill  had  been  introduced  in  the  House, 
by  Noell,  of  Missouri,  and  it  provided  that  the  Government 
would  apply  ten  million  dollars  to  aid  in  the  emancipation  of 
all  the  slaves  of  Missouri,  upon  the  passage  of  a  bill  for  that 
purpose,  irrepealable  except  by  the  consent  of  the  United  States. 
This  bill  passed  the  House.  In  the  Senate  it  was  referred  to 
the  Judiciary  Committee,  which  reported  a  substitute,  providing 
for  "the  gradual  or  immediate  emancipation  of  all  slaves  in 
Missouri,  to  take  effect,  on  some  day,  not  later  than  July 
fourth,  1876.  If  it  took  effect  before  July  fourth,  1865,  the 
amount  to  be  appropriated,  by  the  Government,  was  to  be 
twenty  million  dollars,  if  after  that  date  ten  million  dollars. 
The  amount  appropriated,  however,,  was  not  in  any  event  to 
exceed  three  hundred  dollars  for  each  slave  thus  emancipated. 

Sumner  was  opposed  to  the  three-hundred-dollar  limit.  He 
thought  it  was  too  large  and  should  not  exceed  two  hundred 
dollars.  But  he  was  especially  opposed  to  the  gradual  feature 
of  the  bill.  He  contended  that  it  was  a  war  measure  and,  to 
provide  that  it  should  not  take  effect  for  ten  or  twenty  years, 
was  to  his  mind  ridiculous.  For  the  sake  of  the  country  as  well 
as  Missouri  and  for  the  sake  of  every  slave,  Abolition  should 
be  completed,  at  the  earliest  possible  moment.  The  bill  pro 
vided  for  a  certain  sum,  if  it  took  effect  in  two  years  and  a  cer 
tain  other  sum  if  it  took  effect  in  thirteen  years.  He  was 
opposed  to  any  such  alternative.  He  wished  it  to  take  effect  at 
once  so  that  he  might  see  the  benefit  of  it  and  have  it  felt  in 
the  suppression  of  the  Rebellion.  For  such  a  sum  we  ought  to 
expect  something  very  positive  to  be  done  for  the  ending  of  the 
war.  He  could  not  see  any  good  to  result  by  allowing  eman 
cipation  to  drag  through  all  these  years,  with  the  possibility 
of  reaction  and  the  certainty  of  controversy  through  the  whole 
time. 

"What  is  done  in  war/'  he  said,  "must  be  done  promptly, 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  457 

except,  perhaps,  under  the  policy  of  defence.  Gradualism  is 
delay  and  delay  is  the  betrayal  of  victory.  If  you  would  be 
triumphant,  strike  quickly,  let  your  blows  be  felt  at  once,  with 
out  notice  or  premonition,  and  especially  without  time  for  re 
sistance  or  debate.  Time  deserts  all  who  do  not  appreciate  its 
value.  Strike  promptly,  and  time  becomes  your  invaluable  ally; 
strike  slowly,  gradually,  prospectively,  and  time  goes  over  to  the 
enemy/' 

Sumner  moved  to  amend  the  bill,  by  substituting  two  hun 
dred  dollars,  for  three  hundred,  as  the  limit  to  be  paid  for  each 
slave.  This  amendment  was  adopted.  He  also  moved  to  sub 
stitute  1864  for  1876  so  that  the  act  should  go  into  operation 
on  July  fourth  1864.  This  motion  was  lost.  He  then  moved  to 
strike  out  the  word  "gradual"  so  that  the  money  should  be 
paid  only  on  immediate  emancipation.  He  was  opposed  to  a 
gradual  war  measure.  This  motion  too  was  lost.  The  bill  then 
came  on  for  passage  with  the  gradual  emancipation  feature  in 
it.  Sumner  voted  for  it  declaring  that  he  only  did  so,  knowing 
it  would  go  back  to  the  House,  where  it  could  be  amended,  so  as 
to  leave  out  these  unnatural  provisions.  The  bill  went  back  to 
the  House,  but  was  lost  in  the  rush  of  business,  incident  to  the 
closing  hours  of  the  session.  The  whole  subject  of  compensated 
emancipation  soon  disappeared,  in  the  comprehensive  destruc 
tion  of  slavery,  by  the  Thirteenth  Amendment  of  the  Constitu 
tion. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

DANGERS    FROM    ENGLAND    AND    FRANCE SUMNER?S    WORK     IN 

PRESERVING     PEACE CORRESPONDENCE SPEECH     ON     FOR 
EIGN   RELATIONS ARTICLE  ON   FRANKLIN   AND   SLIDELL  IN 

PARIS 

REFERENCE  has  already  been  made  to  one  of  the  really  great 
works  that  Sumner  did  for  his  countrymen,  and  for  which  he 
is  entitled  to  their  gratitude,  accomplished  largely  outside  of 
his  official  life ;  I  refer  to  his  efforts  to  maintain  peace  with 
foreign  nations,  especially  England.  This  requires  some  ex 
planation.  During  the  Civil  War,  our  relations  with  these  na 
tions  were  often  strained.  With  France  and  England,  we  were 
more  than  once  on  the  very  verge  of  war.  It  required  the  ut 
most  patience  and  forbearance,  on  the  part  of  the  Government, 
and  especially  of  President  Lincoln  and  his  Secretary  of  State, 
Mr.  Seward,  to  avert  it,  owing  to  the  trying  position,  in  which 
they  placed  us,  with  the  people.  No  one  upheld  the  hands  of 
the  President  and  his  Secretary,  better  than  Sumner,  and  next 
to  them,  no  one  is  entitled  to  more  of  the  credit. 

The  causes  of  these  foreign  troubles  developed  early  in  the 
war.  The  South  then  had  plenty  of  money.  The  cotton  crop 
never  was  so  large,  up  till  that  time,  as  in  1860.  The  sale  of 
this  crop,  mostly  in  England,  had  brought  a  large  sum  of  ready 
money  to  the  Southern  people.  The  crop  of  the  next  year  was 
only  about  half  so  large  and  this  was  reduced  to  one-fifth,  for 
the  year  1862.  As  a  consequence,  the  price  of  cotton,  owing 
to  this  reduced  production,  and  the  increased  difficulty  in  get 
ting  it  to  market,  had  advanced  from  ll^t/.  in  Liverpool,  in 
1861,  to  24y2d.  in  1862.  It  would  sell,  in  Liverpool,  for  four 
times  its  price,  in  Charleston.  The  demand  for  it  was  great. 
But  equally  great  was  the  difficulty  of  getting  it. 

Three  days  after  the  surrender  of  Fort  Sumter,  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  Confederacy  had  authorized  the  issue  of  letters  orf 
marque  and  reprisal ;  and  two  days  later,  President  Lincoln  had 
proclaimed  a  blockade  of  the  Southern  ports  and  that  priva 
teers,  with  letters  of  marque  from  the  Confederacy,  would  be 
treated  as  pirates.  Of  course,  a  good  deal  of  this  on  both  sides, 
was  a  war  on  paper.  The  South  found  no  one  to  whom  to 
issue  her  letters  of  marque,  and  the  North  had  no  navy  with 

458 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  459 

which  to  enforce  the  blockade.  Both  sides  hoped  the  whole 
affair  would  end  with  bluster,  and  each  that  it  would  result 
in  its  own  government  having  its  own  way.  While  affairs  were 
still  in  this  condition,  and  before  the  Minister  to  England, 
appointed  by  President  Lincoln,  could  reach  London,  where  it 
was  hoped  he  could  present  the  situation  of  his  government  ^and 
advise  delay,  until  the  pacific  intentions  of  Lincoln's  adminis 
tration  could  be  seen  and  the  South  have  an  opportunity  to 
take  calmer  counsels,  England,  with  unseemly  haste,  recognized, 
by  public  proclamation,  the  Confederate  States  as  belligerents. 

This,  of  course,  added  fuel  to  the  flames.  Where  there  was 
hope  before,  all  was  dark  now.  This  right  accorded  the  South 
by  a  powerful  nation,  like  England,  encouraged  her  to  expect 
prompt  recognition  as  an  independent  nation,  and,  perhaps, 
intervention.  This,  the  South  reasoned,  would  mean  Independ 
ence.  Belligerent  rights  gave  the  South  increased  facilities  for 
obtaining  supplies  of  war  and  for  recognition.  These  she  en 
ergetically  used,  hoping  that  before  the  North  could  arm  her 
self  for  the  conflict,  resistance  would  be  useless. 

Nothing  was  left  the  North,  but  to  go  forward  energetically, 
to  prepare  for  war,  and  to  provide  the  means  to  enforce  the 
blockade  she  had  declared.  War  ships  would  do  this,  as  well 
as  curtail  the  exercise  of  the  rights  of  belligerency,  which  had 
been  so  promptly  extended.  The  energy  with  which  the  North 
met  the  demand  for  ships,  will  be  seen  when  it  is  remembered 
that,  when  Lincoln  was  inaugurated,  the  United  States  had  but 
one  single  vessel  in  a  Northern  port  fit  for  aggressive  opera 
tions.  By  the  end  of  1863,  she  had  six  hundred,  which  was  in 
creased  to  seven  hundred,  before  the  war  closed.  As  an  illus 
tration  of  how  rapidly  this  work  was  done,  it  may  be  stated,  that 
one  contractor,  James  B.  Eads,  furnished  finished,  in  less  than 
one  hundred  days,  eight  ships  of  an  aggregate  of  five  thousand 
tons  burden.  Yet  when  the  contract  was  taken,  the  timber  had 
to  be  cut  from  the  woods  and  the  machinery  made  with  which 
to  manufacture  the  armor. 

This  powerful  navy,  thus  created,  was  manned  by  brave  and 
capable  men,  loyal  to  their  flag  and  ambitious  to  distinguish 
themselves  in  its  service.  It  promptly  grappled  with  the  work 
of  enforcing  the  blockade  and  of  closing  the  ports  of  the  South, 
so  as  to  prevent  all  trade  with  Europe.  This  trade  was  im 
mensely  profitable,  in  the  early  years  of  the  war,  when  the  South 
had  cotton  to  sell  and  money  with  which  to  buy  supplies.  It 
is  estimated  that  the  profits  on  a  single  cargo  of  cotton  goods 
to  the  South  with  the  return  cargo  of  cotton,  owing  to  the  great 
difference  of  prices,  between  Charleston  and  Liverpool  would 


4 GO  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

more  than  repay  the  cost  of  construction  of  the  best  steamer, 
and  the  expenses  of  the  voyage.  The  trade  opened  a  great  field 
for  enterprise,  and  encouraged  by  the  attitude  of  their  home 
governments  towards  the  North,  with  their  friendship  for  the 
South,  European  shipping  rushed  into  the  business.  Blockade 
running  became,  for  the  time,  of  wonderful  extent.  To  facili 
tate  it,  depots  of  supplies  were  established  at  neighboring 
friendly  ports,  such  as  Nassau,  on  one  of  the  Bahama  Islands, 
near  the  coast  of  Florida.  Here  goods  could  be  carried  and 
landed,  in  large  quantities,  with  perfect  safety  to  the  vessel, 
from  risk  of  capture,  and,  a  favorable  opportunity  being 
watched,  they  could  thence  be  carried,  in  poorer  and  smaller 
vessels,  into  Southern  ports.  If  the  last  transit  could  be  pre 
vented,  of  course,  the  business  would  be  destroyed.  It  was  as 
important  for  the  North  to  break  it  up,  as  it  was  to  destroy 
the  supplies  of  the  Confederate  armies  or  to  capture  their  guns. 
Indeed,  these  guns  when  captured  were  often  found  to  be  made 
in  England,  or  other  parts  of  Europe. 

How  well  the  Northern  navy  did  its  work,  is  seen,  when  we 
remember  that  more  than  seven  hundred  British  vessels  alone 
were  sunk  by  it  during  the  war.  These  were  mostly  vessels 
engaged  in  this  contraband  trade.  Their  owners  were  in  sym 
pathy  with  the  South  and  were  favorable  to  her  success;  and 
the  destruction  of  their  ships,  even  though  engaged  in  this 
business,  awakened  a  deep-seated  animosity  towards  the  North, 
that  easily  found  its  expression,  and  its  influence,  at  home. 
The  number  of  these  ship-owners  was  large,  but  the  number 
affected  by  the  destruction  of  the  ships,  those  who  built  them, 
repaired  them,  supplied  them  and  were  in  different  ways  re 
lated  to  them,  was  larger  still.  It  was  a  powerful  influence 
against  the  Union.  It  united  against  the  North  the  aristo 
cratic  classes  of  England,  in  large  measure  her  governing 
classes,  whose  sympathies  went  out  to  the  South  rather  than 
to  their  more  democratic  brethren  of  the  North.  It  was  soon 
seen  that  the  active  portion  of  the  British  nation  was  against 
the  North. 

Mr.  Seward  with  some  bitterness  recorded  the  feeling,  when 
he  said :  "  It  is  indeed  manifest  in  the  tone  of  the  speeches, 
as  well  as  in  the  general  tenor  of  popular  discussion,  that 
neither  the  responsible  ministers,  nor  the  House  of  Commons, 
nor  the  active  portion  of  the  people  of  Great  Britain  sympathize 
with  this  Government,  and  hope,  or  even  wish,  for  its  success  in 
suppressing  the  insurrection;  and  that  on  the  contrary  the 
whole  British  nation,  speaking  practically,  desire  and  expect 
the  dismemberment  of  the  Republic/' 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  461 

The  transition  from  sentiments  to  open  acts  of  hostility  was 
easy.  The  building  and  arming  and  equipment,  in  England, 
of  men-of-war  to  be  used  in  the  service  of  the  South,  tended 
strongly  to  inflame  the  feeling  of  the  Northern  States.  The 
Florida  and  the  Alabama  were  both  built  at  Liverpool  in  1862 
and  were  both  sunk,  in  1864,  after  two  years  of  destructive 
service,  in  the  Confederate  cause.  With  British  crews,  and 
gunners  trained  in  the  English  navy,  drawing  all  their  supplies 
from  England  and  never  entering  a  Rebel  port,  they  captured, 
robbed  and  burnt  Union  property,  wherever  it  could  be  taken. 
Their  depredations  excited  a  bitter  feeling,  in  the  North,  which 
was  never  satisfied  till  the  damages  were  assessed  by  the 
Geneva  award,  in  1872,  and,  subsequently,  paid  by  England. 
The  building  of  two  more  powerful  iron-clad  vessels  at  Liver 
pool,  in  1863,  since  known  as  the  "Rebel  Rams,"  for  similar 
service,  aroused  the  feeling  to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  openly 
declared  that  war  would  ensue  if  they  were  permitted  to  sail. 
But'  the  victories  of  Gettysburg  and  Vicksburg,  with  the  re 
treat  of  one  Confederate  army  and  the  surrender  of  the  other, 
fortunately  for  both  sides,  disclosed  to  England,  the  true  con 
dition  of  the  Confederacy,  and  the  Rams  never  sailed. 

The  Trent  affair,  where  Mason  and  Slidell,  two  emissaries  of 
the  Confederate  government  accredited  respectively  to  Eng 
land  and  France  were  unlawfully  taken,  from  a  British  vessel, 
by  a  Northern  ship  and  afterwards  given  up,  has  already  been 
mentioned.  These  with  other  causes  of  feeling,  all  too  numer 
ous,  were  drawing  the  nations  far  apart  and  threatening  war. 

But  in  all  this  picture,  the  part  taken  by  the  good  Queen  of 
England  and  her  laboring  classes,  especially  the  operatives  of 
the  cotton  mills  of  Manchester,  who  were  sorely  pressed  by  the 
conditions  the  war  placed  on  their  labor,  should  never  be  for 
gotten.  They  remained  steadfastly  the  friends  of  the  North. 
The  Queen,  less  blinded,  perhaps,  by  too  close  contact  with  de 
tails,  saw  from  her  high  position,  with  true  womanly  instinct, 
the  meaning  of  the  struggle  with  slavery,  far  more  clearly  than 
some  of  her  Ministers,  notably  Lord  John  Russell,  her  secre 
tary  of  Foreign  Affairs,  and  Mr.  Gladstone,  her  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer.  The  plain  people,  to  their  credit  be  it  said,  are 
generally  for  liberty  and  against  slavery.  In  this  case  fortu 
nately  for  us,  they  had  as  their  leaders  such  men  as  John  Bright 
and  Richard  Cobden  and  some  too  among  the  nobility  as  the 
Duke  and  Duchess  of  Argyll.  But  the  situation  in  England 
was  full  of  danger. 

In  France,  our  prospects  were  hardly  less  threatening.  While 
she  did  not  permit  blockade  running  under  her  flag,  she 


462  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

did  accord  to  the  South  the  rights  of  belligerency,  on  the 
ocean,  so  that  without  a  single  open  port,  the  Confederacy  en 
joyed  immunity  for  her  vessels,,  as  lawful  cruisers  and  allowed 
all,  who  could,  to  furnish  her  supplies  and  munitions  of  war. 
Considering  the  time  also  propitious,  she  made  a  pretext  for 
war  with  our  sister  Eepublic  of  Mexico,  in  concurrence  with 
England  and  Spain.  The  latter  two  very  soon  withdrew,  but 
France  continued  her  aggression,  to  the  point  of  an  armed  in 
vasion,  with  an  attempt  to  make  the  Archduke  Maximilian  of 
Austria  the  Emperor  of  Mexico.  This  was  in  direct  contra 
vention  of  all  the  ancient  precedents  of  the  United  States,  des 
ignated  as  the  Monroe  doctrine,  against  the  extension  of  Eu 
ropean  dominion,  upon  this  continent.  It  would  not  have  been 
attempted,  but  for  the  dire  extremity,  in  which  our  fortune 
was  placed,  in  1862-3. 

A  persistent  effort  was  also  made,  by  the  French  Emperor, 
to  mediate,  in  the  struggle  between  the  North  and  the  South. 
He  proposed  to  England  and  Russia  to  unite  with  him,  in  this 
tender,  accompanying  it,  with  a  proposition  for  an  armistice, 
for  six  months,  during  which  every  act  of  war  should  cease ! 
England  and  Russia,  however,  better  informed,  declined  the 
part  proposed.  The  offer  was  promptly  rejected  by  President 
Lincoln ;  and  by  solemn  resolution,  of  both  Houses  of  Congress, 
it  was  attributed  to  a  "  misunderstanding "  of  the  real  ques 
tion  at  issue  and  the  character  of  the  war.  Congress  declared 
that  a  repetition  of  the  offer  would  be  considered  "  an  un 
friendly  act."  It  could  have  no  other  effect  than  to  encourage 
the  South  and  was  construed  with  the  reception  of  the  agents  of 
the  Confederacy,  at  the  Tuileries  and  Fontainebleau,  as  an  at 
tempt  to  aid  the  Rebellion.  The  resolutions  were  drafted,  by 
Sumner,  and  were  adopted  by  large  majorities,  in  the  Senate 
and  House,  and  then  sent,  as  they  provided,  to  our  Ministers 
abroad  to  be  communicated  to  the  governments,  to  which  they 
were  accredited.  Lieber  declared  that  they  did  not  sound 
like  resolutions,  but  as  a  proclamation,  by  the  people,  through 
their  representatives,  "  as  if  America  herself  had  said  it,  her  left 
hand  on  her  sword,  her  right  stretched  forward  to  the  multi 
tude  of  nations/' 

The  influence  of  such  acts  upon  the  people  of  the  North  can 
be  readily  imagined.  The  feeling  was  that  our  treatment,  by 
these  powers,  in  such  a  crisis,  was  not  fair ;  that  instead  of  up 
holding  a  people,  in  its  effort  to  create  a  slave  nation,  their  in 
fluence  should  be  cast  in  the  scale  of  humanity  and  for  the 
North ;  or  if  that  could  not  be,  that  they  should  at  least  main 
tain  an  attitude  of  neutrality,  in  fact.  The  constant  recurrence, 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  4G3 

of  evidence  of  a  different  spirit,  developed  a  strong  feeling,  in 
the  North,  against  the  offending  nations.  Northern  merchants 
could  not  see  their  vessels  sunk  and  their  cargoes  destroyed, 
by  freebooting  vessels,  of  other  professedly  neutral  nations, 
without  an  outraged  sense  of  their  wrongs.  They  cried  loudly 
for  redress.  Soldiers  declared  they  were  as  ready  to  fight  their 
secret  enemies,  who  furnished  guns,  as  their  open  enemies  who 
used  them.  There  was  a  strong  war  feeling  developed  against 
both  England  and  France,  especially  against  England.  A  war, 
with  either  of  them,  in  our  then  trying  situation,  would  have 
been  dangerous. 

In  explanation  of  the  conduct  of  England  and  France,  it  can 
be  said  that  their  governing  classes,  their  nobility  and  landed 
gentry,  feared  the  tendency  of  democratic  institutions.  The 
entire  absence  in  the  United  States  of  hereditary  rank  and  of 
primogeniture,  which  played  so  great  part  in  maintaining  the 
position  of  their  upper  classes,  was  an  example  which  they 
would  gladly  have  seen  removed.  The  people  they  thought  had 
too  much  part  in  our  institutions.  They  had  been  taught  to 
believe  that  such  a  form  of  government  could  not  be  permanent. 
When  the  Rebellion  came,  it  was,  therefore,  not  unexpected  to 
them.  They  had  anticipated  some  such  result  as  the  outcome 
of  an  attempt  of  popular  government.  They  believed  it  was 
only  the  natural  and  expected  falling  apart  of  the  nation  and 
that  the  South  would  ultimately  succeed.  The  moral  aspect  of 
the  question,  the  overthrow  of  slavery,  they  had  overlooked. 
Indeed  this  was  not  surprising;  for  the  Administration,"  the 
North  itself,  in  the  early  period  of  the  war  had  kept  it  in  the 
background.  Lincoln's  paramount  wish  was  to  save  the  Union 
and  it  was  not  his  purpose,  at  first,  to  disturb  slavery,  where  it 
already  existed.  He  hoped,  by  assuring  the  South  of  this,  to 
secure  her  early  return  to  the  Union. 

The  events,  that  aroused  Europe  to  the  true  meaning  of  the 
war,  were,  first,  the  Proclamation  of  Emancipation  and,  sec 
ond,  the  victories  of  Gettysburg  and  Vicksburg.  The  first 
came  after  the  bloody  battle  of  Antietam,  in  September,  1862 
and  the  second  came,  in  July,  1863,  and  both  long  after  the 
opening  of  the  war.  The  one  by  a  national  act  proclaimed  the 
anti-slavery  character  of  the  war  for  the  Union;  the  other,  by 
sweeping  and  decisive  victories,  announced,  in  unmistakable 
terms,  the  determination  of  the  North  and  the  hopeless  char 
acter  of  the  struggle  of  the  South.  Then  European  sympathy 
for  the  South  quickly  fell  away;  the  tide  turned  toward  the 
North  and  the  danger  of  a  foreign  war  disappeared. 

The  real  danger  to  the  Union,  from  abroad,  was  before  this. 


464  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  it  was  then  that  the  good  work  of  its  friends  was  done. 
Simmer's  correspondence,  till  then,  had  been,  with  his  Eu 
ropean  acquaintances,  merely  a  friendly  one.  But  he  had  kept 
up  and  extended  his  friendships  and  his  views  were  well-known 
upon  the  question  of  slavery  and  the  danger  it  threatened,  to 
the  Republic.  His  visit  to  Europe  in  1857  when  in  search  of 
health,  after  the  assault  by  Brooks,  had  drawn  the  attention  of 
his  friends  to  the  subject.  His  visit  to  John  Bright  at  Llan- 
dudno  had  led  to  a  mutual  regard  and  a  correspondence.  He 
became  our  most  powerful  advocate  in  Great  Britain.  He  was 
an  orator  of  the  first  rank,  of  sturdy  common  sense  and  so  per 
fectly  fearless  that  Cobden  wrote  of  him  that  "  he  rather  liked 
to  battle  with  the  long  odds  against  him."  He  knew  the  re 
sources  of  the  North  as  compared  with  those  of  the  South  and, 
when  Gladstone  prophesied  victory  for  the  Rebellion  and  de 
clared  that  Jefferson  Davis  had  made  both  an  army  and  a  navy 
and,  what  was  greater  than  either,  a  nation,  Bright  sturdily 
pronounced  it  a  vile  speech  and  eloquently  predicted  that  the 
Nation  would  come  out  of  the  struggle,  "  one  people  and  one 
language  and  one  law  and  one  faith  and,  over  all  that  wide  con 
tinent,  the  home  of  freedom  and  a  refuge  for  the  oppressed  of 
every  race  and  of  every  clime." 

During  the  whole  struggle,  Sumner  kept  closely  in  touch  with 
Bright ;  they  exchanged  frequent  and  long  letters,  communi 
cated  their  private  opinions  and  each  conveyed  to  the  other 
prophecies  of  probable  future  steps  of  their  own  governments. 
The  letters  to  Sumner  when  received  were  often  conveyed  by 
him  to  President  Lincoln  by  whom  they  were  read  and  their 
contents  discussed  and  sometimes  they  were  laid  before  the 
Cabinet.  The  influence  for  good  of  John  Bright  and  Sumner 
in  molding  and  influencing  the  sentiment  of  their  two  coun 
tries  and  holding  each  back  from  rash  steps,  that  too  certainly 
would  have  led  to  war,  cannot  now  be  overestimated.  The 
debt  of  gratitude  we  owe  to  John  Bright  should  never  be  for 
gotten.  In  Parliament  and  on  the  platform  and  privately  in 
well  directed  speech,  in  influential  circles,  and  elsewhere,  he 
towered  the  leader  of  the  plain  people  of  Great  Britain,  for 
freedom  and  against  slavery,  for  national  unity  and  well-being, 
in  a  great  crisis. 

In  another  class,  Sumner's  influence  reached  the  Duke  and 
Duchess  of  Argyll.  Among  the  earliest  of  Sumner's  English 
friends  will  be  remembered  Lord  Morpeth,  later  Earl  Carlyle, 
whom  Sumner  met  in  England  on  his  first  visit  and  later  in 
Boston,  while  travelling  in  Amerira.  The  Duchess  of  Argyll 
was  his  niece,  the  daughter  of  his  sister  the  Duchess  of  Suther- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  465 

land.  This  family  became  Sumner's  warm  friends  and  ad 
mirers  and  took  a  deep  interest,  in  his  public  career.  He  cor 
responded  with  the  Duchess  of  Argyll,  all  through  the  period  of 
the  war,  and  her  letters  are  full  of  expressions  of  sympathy,  for 
the  Union  cause  and  of  fervent  piety  and  trust.  She  was  of  a 
deeply  religious  character  and  could  have  no  sympathy  with 
human  slavery.  She  earnestly  hoped  for  its  extinction.  Her 
husband,  the  Duke  of  Argyll  was,  during  the  war,  the  Keeper 
of  the  Privy  Seal  and,  therefore,  a  member  of  Queen  Victoria's 
Cabinet.  Besides  reading  the  letters  of  Sumner  and  the 
Duchess  he  also  wrote  occasionally  to  Sumner.  Though 
guarded  in  his  letters,  they  show  that  he  did  not  mistake  the 
character  of  the  struggle.  Sumner  earnestly  pressed  upon  them 
his  views,  his  confidence  in  the  ultimate  triumph  of  the  North 
and  he  urged  upon  them  earnestly,  their  duty  to  keep  England 
true  to  the  moral  side  of  the  question.  He  wrote  to  her,  April 
7,  1863,  "  Remember,  my  dear  friend,  I  am  no  idolater  of  the 
Union;  I  have  never  put  our  cause  on  this  ground.  But  I 
hate  slavery;  and  never,  through  any  action  or  non-action  of 
mine  shall  a  new  slave-empire  be  allowed  to  come  into  being,  to 
insult  God  and  man/'  Though  she  doubted  the  success  of  his 
cause,  her  answer  was :  "  My  hope  and  prayer  is  that  you  may 
come  out  of  the  fiery  trial  stronger,  freer,  happier  than  before/' 
These  are  not  the  only  correspondents  Sumner  had  in  Europe 
during  this  period.  I  use  them  only  as  illustrations  of  his  work, 
in  this  direction.  Among  others  could  be  mentioned,  W.  E. 
Foster  and  Richard  Cobden,  among  members  of  Parliament. 
The  latter  wrote :  "  It  is  nothing  but  your  great  power  that  has 
kept  the  hands  of  Europe  off  you/'  He  had  a  large  acquaint 
ance  and  he  corresponded  with  many  others.  He  knew  person 
ally  Earl  Russell,  the  Secretary  for  Foreign  Affairs  and  Mr. 
Gladstone,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  who  attained 
prominence,  as  representatives  in  the  English  Cabinet,  of  the 
element,  in  Great  Britain,  favorable  to  the  South.  He  kept  in 
touch  with  them,  read  their  speeches,  studied  their  conduct 
and  noted  English  newspaper  comment  upon  it.  Sumner's 
position  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, 
in  the  Senate,  gave  added  weight  to  his  opinions  in  England, 
where  his  abilities  were  well-known.  He  was  understood  as 
standing  near  to  President  Lincoln's  administration,  and  his 
letters  were  looked  to,  as  foreshadowing  action,  that  would  prob 
ably  be  taken  by  the  North,  and  as  explaining  her  feeling  to 
wards  England.  Sumner's  peace  principles  were  well-known 
and  it  was  readily  seen  from  his  letters,  that  he  looked  beyond 
any  mere  personal  considerations,  and  to  the  real  well-being  of 


466        LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

both  nations,  in  deprecating  action  by  either  that  might  lead 
to  war.  While  he  frankly  told  England,  in  1861-2,  she  was 
writing  a  sorry  chapter,  in  her  history,  the  letters  of  his 
friends  revealed  that  she  was  not  all  for  the  South,  that  there 
was  a  powerful  influence  there  still,  for  the  North,  and  this  rev 
elation  counselled  and  encouraged  patience. 

Sumner  was  convinced,  during  the  earlier  years  of  the  war, 
that  its  anti-slavery  character  was  not  properly  understood, 
in  England,  and  in  his  letters  to  correct  this  impression,  he 
was  unwearied,  in  pressing  the  moral  side  of  the  question,  upon 
his  correspondents.  He  insisted  with  earnestness  that  slavery 
caused  the  war,  that  slavery  alone  maintained  it,  that  England, 
after  all  her  work  for  emancipation,  could  not  ignore  her  na 
tional  position  upon  this  question,  and  unite  with  the  South, 
in  creating  and  introducing,  into  the  family  of  nations,  a  new 
power,  whose  chief  cornerstone  was  slavery.  He  scouted  the 
idea  maintained  by  English  Southern  sympathizers  that  it  was 
a  struggle,  like  so  many  of  the  old  world  and  of  the  new  too,  in 
the  American  Revolution,  for  extension  of  territory,  upon  the 
one  side  and  for  independence  on  the  other.  He  solemnly 
warned  them,  that  there  was  a  right  and  a  wrong  to  the  ques 
tion,  that  God  had  His  side  and  He  could  not  be  ignored,  that 
though  they  might  attempt  it,  sooner  or  later  He  would  be 
heard.  It  was  this  idea,  thoroughly  possessing  the  minds  of 
such  men  as  John  Bright  that  gave  them  the  influence  they 
had,  in  their  speeches,  to  hold  back  the  hand  of  England  from 
decisive  action,  for  the  South. 

Sumner  deprecated  strongly  the  action  of  the  English  govern 
ment,  in  permitting  the  Florida  and  the  Alabama,  to  be  built, 
and  manned  and  provisioned  in  England,  and  to  go  forth  to 
their  harvest  of  destruction.  When  the  Rebel  Rams  were 
known  to  be  building,  at  Liverpool,  ostensibly  for  China,  but  in 
reality  for  the  South,  he  wrote  earnestly,  to  prevent  their  being 
permitted  to  sail.  He  insisted  that  while  others  thought  dif 
ferently,  he  had  never  considered  the  affair  of  the  Trent  a 
cause  for  war,  but,  with  these  Rams,  the  case  was  otherwise. 
If  they  were  to  be  permitted  to  sail,  to  sweep  American  com 
merce  from  the  sea,  nothing  could  hold  back  the  dread  day  of  a 
war  with  England.  If  our  commerce  went,,  hers  would  go  next, 
our  nation  would  retaliate,  that  much  as  he  had  sought  to 
preserve  peace,  between  the  two  countries,  any  hand  would  be 
powerless  to  stay  the  flood,  if  those  ships  were  permitted  to  sail, 
that  he  knew  the  temper  of  the  President  and  of  every  member 
of  his  Cabinet,  upon  this  question,  and  much  as  he  hoped  for 
peace,  he  must  agree  with  them  that  war  would  then  be  the 
only  alternative. 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  467 

Sumner  held  up,  before  his  English  friends,  the  condition 
of  our  resources,  as  compared  with  those  of  the  South.  While 
they  were  obliged  to  depend  upon  foreign  countries  for  sup 
plies,  we  were  making  arms  faster  than  we  needed  them.  He 
pointed  out  that  our  credit  was  good,  our  bonds  meeting  with 
ready  sale  and  our  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  having  no  diffi 
culties  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  situation.  While 
Southern  fields  were  abandoned  and  Southern  armies  depleted 
by  the  course  of  the  war,  our  industries  went  on  the  same  as 
ever,  business  was  active,  travel  was  great,  incomes  large  and  the 
country  marching  forward;  that  we  were  reminded,  with  sad 
ness,  by  the  funerals  of  our  dead  and  the  appearance  of  wounded 
soldiers,  upon  our  streets,  of  the  wrongs  of  slavery,  for  which 
we  were  suffering,  still  our  armies  were  easily  kept  up  to  the 
requirements  in  number,  were  well  fed,  well  clothed,  in  good 
spirits  and,  notwithstanding  temporary  reverses,  had  absolute 
confidence  in  our  ultimate  triumph. 

During  the  early  months  of  1863,  Sumner  had  been  asked  to 
address  the  Young  Men's  Republican  Union  of  New  York  City, 
on  our  Foreign  Relations.  The  sympathy  for  the  South  con 
tinued  unabated  in  both  France  and  England.  No  overt  act 
of  war  was  committed,  professions  of  neutrality  were  still  made ; 
but  rumors  of  mediation  continued,  notice  of  a  motion,  for 
the  recognition  of  the  Confederacy,  had  been  given  in  the  Eng 
lish  House  of  Commons;  this  notice  was  renewed;  it  was  fol 
lowed  by  the  presentation  and  debate,  upon  a  petition  for 
negotiations  to  be  opened  with  the  great  powers  of  Europe,  for 
a  joint  recognition  of  the  independence  of  the  Confederate 
States;  the  Florida  and  the  Alabama  still  followed  their  career 
of  destruction,  upon  the  seas ;  the  work  on  the  Rebel  Rams  pro 
gressed  and  neared  completion;  and  the  English  Government, 
in  answer  to  the  protest  of  our  Minister,  Mr.  Adams,  was  in 
sisting  upon  its  inability  to  interfere,  in  any  way,  with  the 
work  on  these  vessels  or  their  sailing.  Mr.  Adams,  in  answer, 
represented  that  the  failure  to  do  so  would  mean  war,  that, 
whatever  might  be  the  professions  of  neutrality,  to  permit  a 
public  enemy  to  fit  out  and  provision  and  man  such  ships,  on 
professedly  neutral  territory,  made  such  a  neutral  a  party  to 
the  war.  It  was  during  the  happening  of  such  events  that 
Sumner  wrote  the  Young  Men's  Republican  Union,  the  last  of 
August,  fixing  September  tenth  as  the  time  for  his  address. 

The  speech  came,  at  a  crisis,  in  our  affairs,  with  England. 
David  Dudley  Field,  the  chairman  of  the  meeting,  in  introduc 
ing  the  speaker,  said :  "  At  no  former  period  in  the  history  of 
the  country  has  the  condition  of  its  foreign  relations  been  so 


468  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

important  and  so  critical  as  it  is  at  this  moment."  The  per 
mission  of  the  Rebel  Rams  to  sail,  one  of  which  had  been  coaled, 
ready  for  her  voyage,  was  expected  to  precipitate  the  conflict. 
Sumner  felt  he  had  exhausted  his  power  to  avert  it,  by  means 
of  correspondence.  He  hoped,  at  the  last  moment,  by  this 
means,  to  avert  the  threatened  calamity.  His  plan  was  to  ob 
tain  a  full  hearing  with  the  English  Cabinet,  to  most  of  whom 
he  was  personally  known,  and  still  stay  their  hand  or,  if  that 
could  not  be  done,  and  the  war  came,  to  place  before  the  world, 
in  plain  and  dispassionate  terms,  the  justification  of  our  course 
and  the  inconsistent  position  of  England.  The  merits  of  the 
controversy  were  also  imperfectly  understood,  at  home.  While 
there  had  been  much  discussion  of  it,  in  the  North,  it  was 
thought  well  to  have  the  whole  case  presented,  in  compact  form, 
so  that  it  would  be  understood.  No  one,  from  his  position,  was 
better  qualified  to  do  this,  than  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee, 
on  Foreign  Relations  of  the  Senate. 

The  address  was  delivered,  in  the  great  hall  of  Cooper  In 
stitute,  of  New  York,  which  had  been  the  scene  of  so  many 
memorable  occasions  in  oratory.  As  soon  as  the  doors  were 
opened,  the  vast  room  was  filled,  its  seats,  aisles,  lobbies  and 
platform,  with  an  audience,  numbering  not  less  than  three 
thousand  people  while  others,  for  want  of  being  able  to  gain 
an  entrance,  were  turned  away.  There  were  gathered  the 
acknowledged  representatives  of  the  intelligence,  wealth  and 
influence  of  the  metropolis.  From  early  evening,  till  eleven  at 
night,  the  great  audience  listened  attentively  to  his  address, 
frequently  interrupting  the  speaker,  with  applause  and  cheers, 
as  he  covered  the  ground  of  our  troubles  with  England  and 
France. 

Three  newspapers  in  New  York  and  two  of  Boston  published 
the  speech  entire,  in  their  columns,  the  next  day,  notwithstand 
ing  its  length.  The  Times,  of  New  York,  gave  up  half  the 
surface  of  the  day's  issue  to  it,  owing  to  the  national  impor 
tance  of  the  subject,  the  speaker's  intimate  knowledge  of  it, 
and  "  his  relations  with  some  of  the  foremost  publicists  of  Eng 
land  and  France."  A  large  edition  of  it  was  printed  and  cir 
culated,  by  the  Union,  under  whose  auspices  it  was  delivered, 
and  copies  of  it  were  sent  to  our  Consul  at  Liverpool  to  be  dis 
tributed  to  each  member  of  the  Cabinet  and  Parliament  of  Eng 
land.  It  was  also  reprinted  in  France,  in  an  abridged  form, 
and  was  largely  commented  upon  in  the  newspapers  of  the  three 
countries.  When  it  reached  England,  Earl  Russell  was  on  a 
visit  to  Scotland.  He  took  occasion,  at  a  public  dinner,  to  refer 
to  it  and  to  answer  some  of  its  parts.  In  one  English  paper, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  469 

Sumner  was  spoken  of  as  the  mouthpiece  of  the  President,  in 
the  delivery  of  it,  and  the  speech  as  having  been  read,  by  him, 
and  the  confidential  members  of  his  Cabinet,  before  delivery. 
This  was  not  true,  as  neither  the  President,  nor  any  member  of 
his  Cabinet,  had  read  a  line  of  it,  before  delivery. 

It  cannot  now  be  questioned  that  the  address  was  opportune 
and  that  it  bore  good  fruit,  though  at  the  time  some  of  Sum- 
ner's  English  friends,  who  felt  there  had  already  been  too  much 
recrimination,  on  both  sides,  objected  to  its  plain  expressions. 
On  the  side  of  the  United  States  there  had  been  indignant  and 
angry  feeling  towards  France  and  England,  but  without  care 
ful  knowledge  of  the  facts,  or  the  law,  as  applicable  to  them. 
Sumner  was  an  acknowledged  authority  on  both.  Her  people 
had  a  feeling  that  their  government  was  too  slow  in  appreciat 
ing  and  resenting  the  injuries.  A  frank  statement  by  one  in 
high  office,  showed  them  that  their  rights  had  not  been  over 
looked  and  their  injuries  would  not  be  forgotten.  It  quieted 
feeling  and  restored  confidence,  in  the  course  of  the  Administra 
tion.  On  the  European  side,  there  was  forgetfulness  of  Our 
rights  and  apparent  indifference,  born,  perhaps,  of  the  thought, 
that  the  hands  of  the  North  were  already  full  of  trouble.  But 
there  was  a  growing  mistrust  and  a  feeling  among  business 
men  that  trouble  was  near  for  England,  bankers  refusing  to 
make  loans  or  extend  credits,  trade  relations  narrowed,  for  fear 
of  war.  It  was  apparent,  to  thinking  people,  on  this  side, 
that  affairs  had  already  progressed  so  far,  that  as  soon  as 
trouble  with  the  South  was  over,  England  would  be  called 
upon  for  redress.  It  was  best  for  her  Cabinet  to  know  the 
ground  of  our  complaint,  so  that  it  could  be  more  cautious,  in 
avoiding  future  cause  for  it,  and  thus  allay  feeling  and 
strengthen  the  hands  of  those,  like  Sumner,  who  really  wished 
for  a  lasting  peace. 

At  the  date  of  the  delivery  of  the  speech,  it  was  supposed  the 
departure  of  the  Rebel  Rams  would  not  be  stopped,  by  the  Eng 
lish  Government.  As  late  as  September  fourth  Earl  Russell  in 
formed  Mr.  Adams  that  the  testimony  against  the  vessels 
was  insufficient  and  that  they  could  not  interfere  with  them. 
But,  on  September  eighth,  he  wrote  that  the  sailing  of  the  ves 
sels  would  be  stopped.  When  he  spoke,  Sumner  did  not  know 
of  this  order  and  feared  the  vessels  would  be  permitted  to  sail. 
He  had  freely  predicted  that,  if  this  took  place,  war  against 
England  would  be  declared.  Under  the  influence  of  Gettys 
burg  and  Vicksburg  and  the  predictions  of  her  best  friends,  of 
the  consequences  of  her  continuance  in  the  course  she  was  pur 
suing,  England's  better  nature  was  beginning  to  assert  itself. 


470  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

The  crisis  had  passed.  The  published  farewell  to  London  of 
Mason,  the  agent  of  the  Confederate  government,  appeared  in 
the  same  issue  of  the  newspapers  as  the  reviews  of  Sumner's 
speech.  Mason  realized  his  presence  there  could  be  no  longer 
useful.  Slidell,  her  ambassador  to  France,  never  returned  to 
America,  but  died  in  London,  in  1871.  But  after  his  change 
in  the  attitude  of  the  English  Cabinet,  the  presence  of  Con 
federate  ambassadors  was  no  longer  dangerous  in  Europe.  ' 

During  this  same  autumn,  and  in  the  same  vein  as  this 
speech,  Sumner  published  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  a  "  Mono 
graph  from  an  old  Note  Book."  It  was  a  contrast  between 
Benjamin  Franklin,  the  representative  of  the  Colonies  and 
John  Slidell,  the  representative  of  the  Confederacy,  at  Paris. 
The  purpose  of  it  was  to  recall  the  brilliant  success  of  Franklin, 
sought  by  all  classes,  and  thus  compelling  the  recognition  of 
princes ;  and  the  position  of  Slidell,  supported  by  the  Emperor 
alone,  and  by  him,  only  because  he  feared  the  example  of  the 
Republic.  Slidell's  reception  at  the  Tuileries  had  been  pointed 
to,  as  compared  with  Franklin's,  to  prove  the  strength  of  the 
Confederacy  abroad.  Sumner  thought  the  error  of  such  a  com 
parison  should  be  corrected. 

The  article  as  reprinted  in  Sumner's  published  works  oc 
cupies  thirty-eight  pages,  thirty-six  of  which  are  devoted  to  a 
description  of  the  reception  of  Franklin,  as  shown  by  historical 
references,  and  only  two,  to  the  reception  of  Slidell.  The 
great  learning  of  Franklin,  with  his  original  investigations, 
in  electricity  and  the  sciences,  his  strong  common  sense,  his 
exquisite  social  qualities,  his  perfect  good  nature,  his  sim 
plicity  of  manners,  his  uprightness  of  soul,  which  made  itself 
felt  in  the  smallest  things,  his  extreme  tolerance,  and  above 
all  his  sweet  serenity,  changing  easily  to  gayety,  caused  his 
acquaintance  to  be  sought  for  everywhere.  The  learned  so 
cieties,  without  political  pretensions,  received  him  as  eagerly 
as  statesmen,  who  were  interested  in  our  new  problems  of  gov 
ernment,  His  ready  wit  and  his  profound  knowledge  of  human 
nature  made  him  as  easily  felt  among  Ministers  as  among  the 
'masses.  His  society  was  sought  for  by  princes,  but  he  ap 
peared  in  the  Capital  of  Fashion  in  the  plain  clothes  of  a 
private  citizen,  "  his  flat  hair  without  powder,  his  round  hat,  his 
coat  of  brown  cloth,"  at  the  court  receptions  contrasted 
strangely  with  "the  bespangled  and  embroidered  dresses,  the 
powdered  and  perfumed  coiffures  of  the  courtiers."  Madame 
Campan,  one  of  the  attendants  of  Marie  Antoinette,  records  that 
she  assisted  at  one  of  the  elegant  fetes  given  to  him  "where  the 
i  most  beautiful  among  three  hundred  ladies  was  designated  to 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

place  a  crown  of  laurel  upon  the  white  head  and  two  kisses  upon 
the  cheeks  "  of  the  aged  American  philosopher.  When  he  left 
to  return  to  America,  the  Queen  sent  a  litter  to  bear  his  sick 
body  gently  to  the  sea ;  and  when  he  died  Mirabeau  pronounced 
a  magnificent  eulogy  upon  him  and,  on  his  motion,  France  went 
into  mourning,  for  him. 

Sumner  described  the  meeting  of  Voltaire  with  Franklin. 
The  aged  dramatist  had  lived  for  many  years  near  Geneva,  in 
Switzerland,  and  had  been  urged,  once  more  to  visit  Paris, 
before  he  died ;  and  he  consented.  His  journey  was  a  progress. 
He  desired  to  meet  Franklin.  The  latter  brought  his  little 
grandson  with  him  and  desired  Voltaire's  benediction.  "  God 
and  Liberty,"  said  Voltaire,  placing  his  hand  upon  the  child's 
head,  "  this  is  the  only  benediction,  proper  for  the  grandson  of 
Franklin."  A  few  weeks  after,  they  met  again  at  the  Academy 
and  were  seated  side  by  side,  when  the  distinguished  company 
applauded.  Thereupon  the  old  men  arose  and  embraced.  "  The 
political  triumphs  of  Franklin  and  the  dramatic  triumph 
of  Voltaire  caused  the  exclamation,  '  Solon  and  Sophocles  em 
brace  ! ' ;  "It  was  more  than  this,"  added  Sumner.  "  It  was 
France  and  America  embracing  beneath  the  benediction  of 
(  God  and  Liberty/ ''  And  Sumner  adds,  closing  his  article, 
and  referring  to  the  reception  of  Slidell :  "  The  earlier  struggle, 
adopted  by  the  enlightened  genius  of  France  was  solemnly 
placed  under  the  benediction  of  '  God  and  Liberty.'  The  pres 
ent  struggle,  happily  thus  far  discarded,  by  that  same  enlight 
ened  genius,  can  have  no  other  benediction  than  e  Satan  and 
Slavery.' ';  So  after  the  extended  and  graceful  description  of 
Franklin  in  France  with  this  short  notice  he  dismissed  John 
Slidell. 

Sumner  continued  to  trace  the  contrast.  The  month  after 
the  publication  of  this  article,  he  was  invited  to  attend  the 
annual  dinner  of  the  New  England  Society  of  New  York.  The 
Senate  being  in  session  he  could  not  go ;  for  he  made  it  a  rule 
not  to  leave  his  post.  But  he  wrote  a  stirring  letter  on  <e  The 
Mayflower  and  the  Slave  ship."  "  Amid  all  the  sorrows  of  a 
conflict  without  precedent,"  he  wrote,  "let  us  hold  fast  to  the 
consolation  that  it  is  in  simple  obedience  to  the  spirit  in  which 
New  England  was  founded  that  we  are  now  resisting  the  bloody 
efforts  to  raise  a  wicked  power  on  the  corner-stone  of  Human 
Slavery,  and  that  as  New  Englanders  we  could  not  do  other 
wise." 

"  If  such  wicked  power  can  be  raised  on  this  continent,  the 
Mayflower  traversed  its  wintry  sea  in  vain." 

"We  remember,  too,  that  another  ship  crossed  at  the  same 


472        LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

time,  buffeting  the  same  sea.  It  was  a  Dutch  ship,  with  twenty 
slaves,  who  were  landed  at  Jamestown,  in  Virginia,  and  became 
the  fatal  seed  of  that  slavery  which  has  threatened  to  over 
shadow  the  land.  Thus  the  same  ocean,  in  the  same  year,  bore 
to  the  Western  Continent  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  consecrated  to 
Human  Liberty,  and  also  a  cargo  of  slaves.  In  the  holds  of 
these  two  ships  were  the  germs  of  the  present  direful  war,  and 
the  simple  question  now  is  between  the  Mayflower  and  the  slave 
ship.  Who  that  has  not  forgotten  God  can  doubt  the  result  ?  " 
Slavery,  as  Sumner  saw  it,  from  this  early  beginning  in  the 
country,  till  its  death,  at  the  close  of  a  bloody  war,  was  a  pro 
longed  tragedy. 


CHAPTER  XXX 

EMANCIPATION — PASSAGE  OF  XIV  AMENDMENT — EQUAL  RIGHTS 

TO  COLORED  MEN,  IN  ARMY,  ON  STREET  CARS,  IN  COURTS 

REPEAL  OP  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  LAWS — SUMMER'S  PERSISTENCY 
— OTHER  MEASURES 

As  the  war  went  on  and  defeat  for  the  Confederacy  seemed 
to  draw  near,  new  questions  presented  themselves  in  Congress. 
Its  Members  were  not  less  busy  than  the  soldiers  in  the  field. 
Those  who  had  been  in  Congress  long  enough,  like  Sumner,  to 
become  leaders,  had  burdens  of  work  and  responsibility  thrust 
upon  them.  Sumner  was  now  in  the  full  tide  of  his  career. 
He  was  one  of  the  recognized  leaders  of  the  Senate.  Strangers 
visiting  that  Chamber  sought  his  face  among  the  first.  He  was 
one  of  the  pioneers  of  the  new  party  that  now  had  undisputed 
control  of  every  department  of  the  Government.  His  recog 
nized  ability,  his  high  treatment  of  moral  questions  and  his 
courageous  struggle  against  slavery  had  brought  him  the  ad 
miration  of  the  plain  people.  He  stood  very  near  to  the  Presi 
dent  who  relied  upon  and  trusted  him  as  a  personal  friend  and 
confidential  adviser.  They  differed,  as  men  will  differ  often, 
but  as  men,  each  respected  the  opinions  of  the  other.  Sumner 
was  bound  to  President  Lincoln  by  personal  ties,  of  mutual 
respect  and  admiration.  Mrs.  Lincoln  shared  her  husband's 
admiration  of  Sumner's  public  career  and  more  than  once,  as 
we  shall  have  occasion  hereafter  to  see,  this  friendship  revealed 
itself.  Sumner  was  frequently  asked  to  drive  with  the  Presi 
dent  alone  and  to  become  one  of  the  President's  party,  on  ex 
cursions  and  at  receptions,  or  in  the  theatre.  Frequently  late 
at  night,  after  the  rush  of  the  day's  work  was  over,  Sumner 
visited  the  President,  by  appointment,  to  discuss  some  pending 
and  important  question.  This  nearness  to  the  President,  ap 
parent  to  a  casual  observer,  increased  the  responsibilities  of 
Sumner's  place.  His  opinions  were  sought  as  reflecting  those 
of  the  President;  his  services  were  valued  as  being  able  to 
influence  the  administration. 

Sumner  never  sustained  the  same  nearness  to  any  other  Presi 
dent.  During  the  Presidencies  of  Pierce  and  Buchanan,  he  was 
in  a  small  minority  of  determined  opponents  of  the  Administra- 

473 


474  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

tion.  While  during  the  Presidencies  of  Johnson  and  Grant,  the 
spirit  of  harmony,  that  obtained  during  the  earlier  months  of 
each,  in  the  White  House,  changed  to  a  spirit  of  active  opposi 
tion  before  the  close.  Johnson  soon  broke  with  his  party  and 
the  Impeachment  proceedings  estranged  him  permanently  from 
his  Eepublican  friends.  In  the  case  of  President  Grant,  his 
scheme  for  the  annexation  of  San  Domingo  was  firmly  opposed 
by  Sumner.  And  his  subsequent  removal  from  the  Chairman 
ship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  by  Grant's  friends, 
in  retaliation,  completed  an  estrangement  that  culminated  in 
Sumner's  support  of  Greeley,  the  nominee  of  the  Democratic 
Party,  as  against  Grant,  for  his  second  term. 

In  January,  1864,  Sumner  introduced  in  the  Senate  a  resolu 
tion  for  the  appointment  of  a  special  committee  on  Slavery 
and  Freedmen,  to  take  into  consideration  all  propositions  and 
papers  concerning  these  subjects,  with  leave  to  report,  by  bill 
or  otherwise.  The  resolution  was  adopted  and  Sumner  was 
made  Chairman  of  the  new  Committee  of  seven.  It  was  a 
committee  growing  out  of  questions  crowding  upon  the  success 
ful  close  of  the  war.  While  not  neglecting  other  duties,  Sum 
ner  kept  his  eye  constantly  on  slavery  and  the  new  wards  of  the 
Republic  who  had  now  acquired  their  freedom.  Being  con 
vinced  that  slavery  had  caused  the  war  and  that  there  could  be 
no  lasting  peace  between  the  sections  while  it  continued  to 
exist,  he  was  determined  that  the  war  should  not  close  without 
its  complete  destruction.  The  new  committee  was  engaged  in 
the  disposition  of  matters  tending  to  this  end.  As  its  chair 
man,  Sumner  prepared  some  important  reports,  upon  bills 
presented  by  it,  to  the  Senate.  They  were  prepared  with  that 
care  and  elaboration  that  characterized  his  work  and  are  to-day 
monuments  of  his  industry. 

By  an  amendment  to  the  Appropriation  Bill,  Sumner  secured 
at  this  session,  the  abolition  of  the  coastwise  slave  trade.  Under 
a  statute,  passed  in  1807,  this  traffic  in  slaves  had  been  legal 
ized.  Early  in  the  session  Sumner  had  reported  from  the  Com 
mittee  on  Slavery  and  Freedmen  a  bill  for  the  prohibition  of 
the  traffic  in  slaves  between  the  States  and  the  transportation  of 
any  slave  on  any  vessel,  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  National 
Government.  Owing  to  the  press  of  other  business,  he  had 
not  been  able  to  get  the  bill  to  a  vote.  He  therefore  moved  the 
repeal  of  the  existing  statute  legalizing  such  traffic,  as  an 
amendment  to  this  appropriation  bill.  The  amendment  carried 
and  the  coastwise  slave  trade  was  thus  abolished. 

It  met  with  opposition.  Sherman  and  Trumbull,  though  not 
opposed  to  the  repeal  of  the  law,  were  opposed  to  it  when  pre- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  475 

sented  in  the  form  of  an  amendment  to  the  appropriation  bill. 
But  Hendricks  in  compliment,  perhaps  unintentional,  to  Sum- 
ner,  said :  "  I  am  surprised  that  any  Senator  should  oppose  the 
proposition  of  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  for  we  all 
know  that  eventually  it  will  be  adopted.  The  objection  to  its 
materiality,  or  proper  connection  with  the  measure,  is  but  an 
objection  of  time.  No  gentleman  can  question  that  the  Senator 
from  Massachusetts  will  eventually  carry  his  proposition." 
But  he  was  opposed  to  the  amendment  and  with  other  Demo 
crats  voted  against  it. 

Another  of  Sumner's  long  struggles  against  slavery  met 
success  at  this  session  of  Congress.  His  early  effort  for  the 
repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  will  be  remembered.  On  the 
tenth  of  December,  1863,  he  gave  notice  of  his  intention  to  offer 
a  bill  to  repeal  all  laws  on  this  subject.  Pursuant  to  this 
notice,  on  the  eighth  of  February,  1864,  he  introduced  a  bill 
for  this  purpose  and,  on  his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the 
committee  on  Slavery  and  Freedom.  On  the  29th  of  February 
he  reported  this  bill  from  the  Committee.  The  accompanying 
report,  recommending  its  passage  and  prepared  by  Sumner, 
was  an  exhaustive  review  of  the  subject  in  fifty-one  pages 
covering  the  history  of  the  legislation  from  the  formation  of 
the  Constitution.  He  gave  the  argument  against  the  con 
stitutionality  of  the  law.  It  was  bad  enough,  he  said,  to  thrust 
an  escaped  slave  back  into  bondage  at  any  time;  it  was  absurd 
to  do  so,  at  a  moment  when  slavery  was  rallying  all  her  forces 
to  destroy  the  Government.  A  slave  that  had  the  courage  and 
address  to  escape  from  his  master,  was  needed  as  a  soldier  for 
freedom.  In  thus  withdrawing  support  from  slavery  there  was 
a  contribution  made  to  emancipation.  To  repeal  these  laws 
encouraged  public  opinion  to  sweep  the  barbarism  from  the 
country. 

In  this  report  he  cited,  as  an  illustration  of  the  cruel  work 
ing  of  the  law,  the  case  of  Margaret  Garner,  who  with  her  three 
children  had  escaped  from  slavery  and  had  reached  Cincinnati, 
when  their  flight  was  arrested.  Unwilling  to  see  her  children 
returned  to  slavery,  with  a  butcher-knife  she  determined  to 
prevent  it,  in  the  only  way  that  lay  in  her  power.  She  had 
killed  one,  an  interesting  little  girl,  almost  white.  To  the  Chris 
tian  minister,  who  interrogated  her  as  to  the  cause  for  the  deed, 
she  answered :  "  The  child  was  mine,  given  to  me  by  God  to  do 
the  best  a  mother  could  by  it.  I  have  done  the  best  I  could ;  I 
would  have  done  more  and  better  for  the  rest;  I  knew  it  was 
better  for  them  to  go  home  to  God  than  back  to  slavery."  But 
she  was  restrained  and  after  the  determination  of  some  ques- 


476  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

tions  of  jurisdiction,  under  the  fugitive  slave  law,  she  with 
her  two  children  remaining  and  the  dead  body  of  the  other, 
emancipated,  were  carried  back  to  slavery  under  an  escort  of 
armed  men. 

The  history  of  this  bill  furnishes  an  excellent  illustration  of 
the  difficulties  Sumner  encountered  and  the  persistency  with 
which  he  met  them.  To  record  the  different  steps  will  serve  as 
an  example  of  what  he  did  both  in  this  and  in  other  instances, 
when  he  wished  to  secure  legislation.  On  March  seventh,  he 
asked  the  Senate  to  make  the  bill  the  order  for  a  future  day. 
This  request  was  granted  and  the  bill  was  made  the  order  for 
March  ninth.  The  next  day  Davis  of  Kentucky  proposed  to 
have  another  question  made  the  order  for  the  same  day.  Sum 
ner  objected  and  reminded  him  that  his  bill  was  fixed  for  that 
day.  Davis  said  it  could  wait;  Sumner  objected.  At  the  ap 
pointed  time  Davis  and  Hendricks  wished  a  postponement  and 
Sumner  consented  to  let  it  go  over  till  March  sixteenth,  Davis 
saying  that  he  wished  to  speak  on  it.  From  March  sixteenth 
till  the  eighteenth,  it  was  crowded  out  by  other  business.  On 
the  eighteenth  Davis  was  still  not  ready  to  speak.  Sumner  then 
gave  notice  that  he  would  take  every  proper  occasion  to  call  up 
the  bill  and  press  its  consideration.  Until  April  eighteenth,  the 
Senate  was  occupied  with  other  business,  especially  the  Thir 
teenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution.  On  that  day  Sumner 
moved  to  take  it  up,  but  the  appropriation  bill  had  precedence. 
On  the  next  day,  on  his  motion,  the  Senate  voted  to  take  it 
up  and  having  been  read  three  times,  without  a  division  and 
without  a  word  of  debate  it  was  ready  for  passage.  Foster,  of 
Connecticut,  then  wished  to  be  heard.  Hendricks  spoke  against 
it.  Sherman,  of  Ohio,  then  declared  he  was  opposed  to  repeal 
ing  the  law  of  1793  and  was  opposed  to  the  bill  as  it  stood, 
because  it  would  repeal  that  law,  as  well  as  the  law  of  1850. 
He  wished  therefore  to  amend  it.  Finding  it  had  passed  this 
stage,  he  moved  to  reconsider  the  motion  ordering  it  to  be  en 
grossed  and  read  the  third  time.  This  motion  to  reconsider 
was  carried.  Sherman  then  moved  to  amend  the  bill,  by  ex 
cepting  from  the  repeal  the  act  of  1793.  He  urged  that  this 
law  had  been  held  constitutional.  Sumner  spoke  against  the 
exception  and  pointed  out  that  it  had  never  been  suggested  to 
the  court,  when  considering  its  constitutionality,  that  this  law 
of  1793  made  no  provision  for  the  trial  of  the  case  of  the  fugi 
tive  slave,  by  jury,  and  upon  that  being  pointed  out,  one  of  the 
judges  who  rendered  the  decision,  had  declared  he  would  con 
sider  its  constitutionality  still  an  open  question.  Sumner  be 
lieved  they  were  all  alike  unconstitutional.  Reverdy  Johnson 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  477 

argued  that  they  were  all  constitutional.  Sumner  especially 
regretted  Sherman's  interference  at  this  late  day,  when  the  bill 
was  just  ready  to  be  passed  and  that  now  after  all  these  years 
of  discussion  it  should  be  thought  necessary  still  to  discuss  it. 

Eeminding  the  Senate  of  his  own  part  against  these  laws,  he 
said :  "  Often,  in  other  times,  I  have  discussed  these  questions 
in  the  Senate  and  before  the  people ;  but  the  time  for  discussion 
is  passed.  And  permit  me  to  confess  my  gladness  in  this  day. 
I  was  chosen  to  the  Senate  for  the  first  time  immediately  after 
the  passage  of  the  Act  of  1850.  By  that  election,  if  I  received 
from  the  people  of  Massachusetts  any  special  charge,  it  was  to 
use  my  best  endeavor  to  secure  the  repeal  of  this  atrocity.  I 
began  the  work  in  the  first  session  I  was  here.  God  grant  that 
I  may  end  it  to-day ! " 

The  amendment  of  Sherman  carried.  Thereupon  Saulsbury, 
of  Delaware,  moved  another  amendment,  which  was  lost.  Then 
Conners,  of  California,  declared  he  was  no  longer  in  favor  of 
the  bill  as  thus  amended  and  moved  to  lay  it  on  the  table. 
Sumner  urged  him  to  withdraw  his  motion  and  vote  for  the  bill, 
for  the  reason  that  they  still  got  something  by  it.  Conners 
refused,  but  his  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  was  lost.  April 
twentieth  the  bill  was  proceeded  with,  when  Foster  spoke  for  it 
as  amended.  Brown,  of  Missouri,  spoke  and  concluded  by  de 
claring  he  could  not  vote  for  it,  as  amended.  Still  other 
amendments  were  proposed ;  finally  the  consideration  of  it  was 
adjourned.  Sumner  was  discouraged  to  pass  it,  in  that  form; 
and  preferred  to  wait  for  the  action  of  the  House. 

On  June  thirteenth,  after  much  contention,  the  House  passed 
a  bill  to  repeal  all  the  fugitive  slave  laws.  June  fifteenth  it 
came  to  the  Senate  and  Sumner  moved  its  immediate  passage. 
Hale,  of  jSTew  Hampshire,  objected;  he  wanted  the  time  for 
other  business.  Powell  moved  its  reference  to  the  Judiciary 
Committee.  This  motion  was  lost.  Sumner  moved  its  refer 
ence  to  the  Committee  on  Slavery  and  Freedmen;  and  this 
carried.  Thereupon  Sumner,  having  anticipated  such  action, 
and  having  already  obtained  authority  from  the  Committee,  to 
report  it  promptly  and  without  amendment,  did  so  and  asked 
immediate  action.  But  objection  was  made. 

On  June  twenty-first  he  moved  to  take  it  up  and  the  motion 
was  carried,  but  after  some  consideration,  the  Senate  took  a 
recess  and  it  went  over.  The  next  day,  Sumner  moved  to  take 
it  up  again;  but  the  motion  was  lost.  At  the  evening  session 
he  again  moved  to  take  it  up.  Saulsbury  thereupon  moved  to 
adjourn,  with  the  exclamation :  "  Let  us  have  one  day  without 
the  nigger ! "  His  motion  was  lost.  Reverdy  Johnson  then 


478  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

asked  an  adjournment,  so  Davis,  of  Kentucky,  could  speak. 
Sunmer  insisted  that  this  business  had  been  postponed  again 
and  again  for  Davis  to  speak.  The  motion  to  proceed  was 
adopted.  Then  a  motion  for  an  executive  session  was  made  and 
debated  and  lost.  Saulsbury  moved  a  postponement ;  lost.  An 
other  motion  for  an  executive  session  was  made  and  lost.  Then 
another  motion  to  adjourn  was  made  and  lost.  At  last  it  was 
agreed  that  it  should  be  reported  without  amendment  and  that 
Davis  should  have  the  opportunity  to  speak  upon  it  the  next 
day.  This  he  did.  Saulsbury  moved  then  to  strike  out  all  after 
the  enacting  clause;  lost.  Johnson  moved  to  amend  so  as  to 
leave  out  the  act  of  1793  in  force;  this  too  was  lost,  the  Senate 
thus  reversing  its  former  vote.  Thereupon  the  bill  was  passed. 
It  was  approved  by  President  Lincoln  June  twenty-eighth. 

Thus  ended  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  for  the  repeal  of  which 
Sumner  had  striven  so  often  and  so  earnestly. 

From  this  illustration,  it  will  be  seen  how  sternly  and  per 
sistently  he  pressed  his  measures  to  the  front  and  insisted  upon 
their  passage.  Defeat  never  seemed  to  dishearten  him.  "  Fail, 
Sir !  No  honest,  earnest  effort  in  a  good  cause  can  fail."  If 
defeated  to-day  he  was  ready  to  renew  the  fight  to-morrow. 
If  crowded  out  then,  he  would  press  his  measure  again  as  soon 
as  an  opportunity  offered.  He  was  invulnerable  against  rid 
icule  or  taunt  or  abuse.  He  had  been  abused  so  much  that  it 
may  fairly  be  asked  whether  he  did  not,  at  times,  feel  a  proud 
pleasure  in  social  ostracism  for  the  sake  of  measures  he  firmly 
believed  to  be  right.  Against  such  persistence  as  he  showed, 
obstruction  was  useless.  He  was  sure  to  wear  out  the  party 
that  undertook  to  wear  him  out.  He  believed  these  measures 
against  slavery  were  right  and  he  was  ready  to  strike,  and 
strike  hard,  and  strike  on  persistently. 

But  it  must  be  confessed  that  his  persistence  sometimes 
angered  his  own  party  associates.  Frequently  they  did  not 
approve  the  measures  he  advocated.  He  strode  on  faster  than 
they  were  sometimes  prepared  to  follow,  in  the  direction  of 
equal  rights.  Yet  they  were  not  prepared  to  go  on  the  record  of 
the  Senate  as  voting  against  some  of  these  measures. 

Take  for  example  his  bill  for  the  equal  rights  of  colored  peo 
ple  on  the  street  cars  of  Washington  and  the  District  of  Colum 
bia.  Separate  cars  had  been  provided  for  them.  But  largely 
through  his  instrumentality,  clauses  were  inserted,  in  some 
companies'  charters,  forbidding  such  a  distinction  and  requiring 
colored  to  be  accorded  the  same  treatment  as  white  passengers. 
While  this  remedied  the  distinction,  under  the  law,  at  least 
upon  those  lines,  it  did  not  as  to  the  others.  The  exclusion 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  479 

still  continued  upon  lines  not  thus  restrained,  to  the  incon 
venience  and  sometimes  the  distress  of  colored  passengers.  He 
therefore  persisted  until  at  this  session  he  procured  the  passage 
of  a  law  forbidding  such  distinction  upon  any  line.  And  when 
this  law  was  not  promptly  obeyed,  in  one  instance,  he  called  the 
attention  of  the  President  of  the  offending  Company  to  it  and 
threatened  if  the  offence  was  repeated  to  have  its  charter  for 
feited;  and  in  other  instances  brought  the  violations  to  the 
attention  of  the  District  Attorney. 

This  persistency  angered  his  associates.  Powell  of  Kentucky 
declared :  "  The  Senator's  staple  is  this  fanatical  idea.  He 
wants  this  little  hobby  to  ride  through  Massachusetts  on  and 
to  feed  a  fanatical  flame  there.  He  can  fool  nobody  here  with 
this  kind  of  thing.  Take  the  negro  out  of  the  Senator's  vocabu 
lary  and  rich  as  it  is,  it  would  be  exceedingly  barren."  His  own 
colleague  Wilson  was  not  in  sympathy  with  him  and  his  friends 
Sherman  of  Ohio  and  Trumbull  of  Illinois  and  Reverdy  John 
son  of  Maryland  all  opposed  his  effort  for  equal  rights  in  the 
street  cars.  But-  nothing  daunted  he  went  on;  he  had  been 
opposed  and  abused  often  enough  before,  and  he  was  not  afraid 
of  it  now.  He  was  opposed  to  all  class  distinctions  and  for 
maintaining  the  complete  equality  of  all  men  in  civil  life  and 
in  the  use  of  public  service  corporations. 

But  to  make  this  concession  in  Washington  was  an  unpopular 
act,  especially  among  the  classes  with  whom  Senators  mingled. 
They  reasoned,  it  was  a  matter  of  personal  comfort,  at  best, 
that  was  directly  concerned,  though  theoretically  it  might  be 
true,  that  all  men,  white  and  black,  should  be  accorded  equal 
privileges  in  a  public  conveyance.  They  would  gladly  evade 
voting  upon  the  question — might  vote  against  it  once,  as  if  in 
advertently.  But  he  would  bring  them  to  the  test,  again  and 
again,  compel  them  to  go  on  record,  till  they  yielded  and  sup 
ported  his  measure,  unwilling  captives  to  his  tactics.  But  they 
laid  it  up  against  him  in  personal  feeling.  It  deprived  him  of 
their  sympathy  and  good  fellowship.  When  the  time  came  as 
in  the  struggle  with  President  Grant,  when  his  removal  from 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  was  proposed,  such  things 
counted  against  him. 

Sumner  at  this  session  proposed  a  measure  that  was  also  un 
popular  among  some  of  his  colleagues  who  desired  patronage 
to  maintain  themselves  in  their  places.  He  introduced  a  bill 
for  the  reform  of  the  civil  service.  With  the  growth  of  the 
country  the  maintenance  of  this  service  had  become  a  duty 
full  of  difficulty.  The  offices  to  be  filled  were  so  numerous  and 
their  importance  to  good  service  so  great  that  with  the  limited 


480  LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

opportunities  of  the  Senators  for  knowledge  of  the  fitness  of  the 
applicants,  the  original  design  that  they  should  be  filled  by  the 
President  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate  had  been 
outgrown.  It  had  been  customary  for  the  President  to  be 
governed  in  appointments  by  the  recommendation  of  the  chief 
elective  officer  of  the  district  where  the  office  was.  The  offices 
under  the  "  spoils  system  "  went  as  a  reward  for  party  work, 
without  sufficient  attention  being  given  to  fitness.  Even  the 
elective  officers,  seeing  the  number  of  places  at  their  disposal 
much  fewer  than  the  wants  of  their  supporters,  found  their  own 
positions  rendered  trying.  When  General  Butler  declared  that 
each  District  ought  to  have  two  Congressmen,  one  to  attend  to 
the  offices  and  the  other  to  perform  the  duties  of  legislation,  he 
voiced  a  sentiment  that  many  Congressmen  appreciated. 

Sumner's  bill  was  offered,  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  April, 
1864,  and  is  the  first  public  movement,  on  this  since  much 
vexed  but  now  conceded  reform.  It  proposed  the  appointment 
by  the  President,  of  a  commission  composed  of  three  Exam 
iners,  appointments  to  the  civil  service  to  be  made  upon  their 
recommendation,  after  an  examination  as  to  fitness,  held  in 
such  places  as  should  be  designated,  by  public  notice,  the 
rank  of  the  applicant  to  be  assigned  according  to  fitness,  as 
shown  by  the  examination,  and  after  appointment  the  officer 
not  to  be  removed,  except  for  good  cause  shown.  The  essentials 
of  the  plan  proposed  in  this  early  bill  have  been  adopted  in  all 
subsequent  legislation,  upon  the  subject.  The  Civil  Service  is 
now  one  of  the  permanent  branches  of  the  Government. 

It  was  not  his  purpose  to  attempt  to  pass  a  bill  at  this  ses 
sion  but  only  to  call  public  attention  to  it  and  endeavor  to  create 
a  sentiment  in  favor  of  a  needed  reform.  It  was  read  twice 
in  the  Senate  and  permitted  to  lie  on  the  table  and  expire  with 
the  Congress.  Its  purpose  was  accomplished,  however,  in 
attracting  attention  to  the  subject  and  securing  its  discussion 
in  the  newspapers. 

At  this  session  he  renewed  his  efforts  to  have  the  exclusion  of 
colored  witnesses  from  the  United  States  courts  removed.  He 
had  sought  twice  before  to  have  this  accomplished,  in  1861  and 
again  in  1862.  He  had  already  secured  the  removal  of  this 
disability  in  the  District  of  Columbia.  On  his  motion  the 
bill  he  introduced  for  this  purpose  was  referred  to  the  Com 
mittee  on  Slavery  and  Freedom.  Three  weeks  later  it  was  re 
ported  by  the  committee,  accompanied  with  a  carefully  pre 
pared  report  in  favor  of  its  passage.  This  report  was  prepared 
by  Sumner  and  occupies  forty  pages  of  his  Works.  It  reviewed 
the  condition  of  the  law  upon  this  question  in  each  of  the  Slave 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  481 

States,  called  attention  to  its  eccentricities  and  discussed  the 
ground  on  which  it  is  based.  He  insisted  that  it  was  a  mere 
prejudice  against  persons  of  a  particular  color  whether  slave 
or  free,  fruitful  of  wrongs  to  the  blacks  whom  it  often  placed 
without  any  legal  protection  against  lawless  outrages,  and  even 
permitted  crimes  against  white  persons. to  go  unpunished.  The 
absurdity  of  the  rule  of  exclusion  was  apparent,  he  urged,  when 
it  was  remembered  that  the  testimony  if  admitted,  would  have 
to  be  weighed  by  white  judges  and  juries,  who  might  reject 
it,  if  their  prejudice  led  them  to  believe  that  colored  witnesses 
were  untrustworthy. 

Failing  to  obtain  a  hearing  for  his  measure,  in  any  other 
form,  Sumner  moved  it  as  an  amendment  to  the  Civil  Appro 
priation  Bill  of  the  session.  Sherman  urged  him  not  to  do  so, 
after  the  experience  of  the  night  before,  which  had  been  spent, 
in  the  discussion  of  an  irrelevant  matter,  with  the  thermometer 
at  ninety-three  degrees.  He  was  sure  it  would  provoke  dis 
cussion.  Other  Senators  urged  him  to  withdraw  it,  but  he  per 
sisted.  The  amendment  was  agreed  to  and,  with  the  appropria 
tion  bill,  it  passed  and  became  a  law. 

Saulsbury  of  Delaware  was  pointed  in  his  opposition  to  it  in 
the  Senate.  "  I  do  not  wish,"  he  said  <e  to  say  anything  about 
the  ' nigger5  aspect  of  this  case.  It  is  here  every  day,  and  I 
suppose  it  will  be  here  every  day  for  years  to  come,  till  the 
Democratic  party  comes  into  power  and  wipes  out  all  legisla 
tion  on  the  Statute  books  of  this  character,  which  I  trust  in 
God  they  will  do  soon." 

Under  this  amendment,  the  colored  man  was  made  as  com 
petent  to  testify  in  the  United  States  courts  as  his  white 
brother.  In  the  slave  States,  until  this  time,  colored  persons 
were  not  competent  to  'testify  as  witnesses. 

On  the  ninth  of  February,  1864,  Sumner  read  in  the  Senate  a 
petition  of  the  Woman's  National  League,  for  universal  eman 
cipation,  by  act  of  Congress.  Though  originally  prepared  and 
circulated  by  women  there  was  a  duplicate  of  it,  signed  by  men. 
The  signers  were  above  the  age  of  eighteen.  The  petition  was 
arranged  by  rolls,  each  roll  representing  a  State,  and  they  came 
from  twenty-four  states  and  Territories.  It  was  called  the 
"  Prayer  of  One  Hundred  Thousand,"  because  signed  by  one 
hundred  thousand  names.  Though  memorable  for  numbers 
Sumner  insisted  that  it  was  more  memorable  for  the  prayer, 
in  which  they  united, — nothing  less  than  universal  emancipa 
tion.  So  far  as  it  was  signed  by  women,  he  admitted  it  was 
simply  a  petition.  But  he  added,  "  there  is  no  reason  so  strong 
as  the  reason  of  the  heart/'  After  reading  the  prayer  of  the 


482  LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

petition  and  some  brief  remarks,  he  moved  its  reference  to  the 
Committee  on  Slavery  and  Freedom.  A  debate  ensued,  but 
it  ended  in  a  reference  to  the  Committee. 

Sumner  was  already  committed  to  universal  emancipation, 
.but  not  by  act  of  Congress.  He  did  not  believe  that  the  simple 
guarantees  of  a  law,  passed  by  Congress  and  approved  by  the 
President,  were  sufficient.  Slavery  had  for  many  years  en 
trenched  itself  behind  certain  clauses  of  the  Constitution  and 
though  he  believed  that  instrument  when  properly  interpreted 
did  not  countenance  it,  he  felt  that  its  abolition  should  be  guar 
anteed  by  a  constitutional  amendment,  forbidding  slavery 
forever  within  the  national  domain.  This  would  place  the 
matter  beyond  the  reach  of  an  act  of  Congress.  It  could  then 
be  reached  only  by  another  amendment  submitted,  after  a  two- 
thirds  vote  of  each  House  of  Congress  or  the  legislatures  of 
two-thirds  of  the  States,  to  be  thereafter  ratified  by  three- 
fourths  of  the  States.  This  would  not  make  it  incapable  of 
change,  but  it  would  make  it  as  incapable  of  change  as  any 
thing  could  be,  under  our  form  of  government.  It  would  cer 
tainly  place  it,  beyond  the  reach  of  the  law-making  power 
alone;  so  that  if  change  were  contemplated  the  States  and  the 
people  would  have  to  be  first  consulted.  This  mode  of  emanci 
pation  would  more  than  satisfy  the  "  prayer  of  the  one  hundred 
thousand." 

The  first  known  movement  for  constitutional  emancipation 
had  its  origin  with  Sumner  himself.  On  the  morning  of  De 
cember  second,  1863,  he  was  a  passenger  on  the  steamboat, 
Empire  State,  on  Long  Island  Sound,  bound  from  Fall  Eiver 
to  New  York,  on  his  way,  to  the  opening  of  Congress.  With 
him,  as  a  fellow  passenger,  was  Henry  C.  Wright  of  Boston, 
on  his  way  to  a  meeting  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society 
at  Philadelphia.  In  the  saloon  of  the  vessel,  Sumner  sketched 
to  Mr.  Wright  his  plan  of  emancipation  and  with  his  own  hand 
drew  up  a  resolution : 

"  That  the  voice  of  the  people  is  heard  through  petitions  to 
Congress  and  this  Convention  earnestly  recommend  that  this 
voice  be  raised  in  petitions  for  an  Amendment  of  the  Constitu 
tion,  declaring  that  slavery  shall  be  forever  prohibited  within 
the  limits  of  the  United  States/' 

Two  days  later,  this  resolution  was  presented,  by  Mr.  Wright, 
to  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society  and  was  adopted  by  it, 
without  a  dissenting  vote. 

On  the  fourteenth  of  December,  1863,  amendments  to  the 
Constitution  abolishing  slavery  were  offered  in  the  House  by 
Ashley  of  Ohio  and  Wilson  of  Iowa  and  on  the  eleventh  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  483 

January  following,  Henderson,  of  Missouri,  introduced  a  sim 
ilar  amendment,  in  the  Senate.  On  February  eight  Sumner 
introduced  another,  in  these  words : 

"  Everywhere  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States,  and 
of  each  State  and  Territory  thereof,  all  persons  are  equal  be 
fore  the  law,  so  that  no  person  can  hold  another  as  slave." 

He  moved  that  it  be  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Slavery 
and  Freedrrien  of  which  he  was  chairman.  Trumbull  objected, 
that  it  should  go  to  the  Judiciary  Committee,  of  which  he  was 
Chairman  and  to  which  the  amendment  offered  by  Henderson 
had  already  been  referred.  Sumner  assented,  only  requesting 
that  the  Committee  act  promptly,  in  reporting.  This  was  done, 
for  on  February  tenth,  only  two  days  later,  Trumbull  reported 
a  substitute  for  the  two  amendments,  in  these  words  : 

"  Section  1.  Neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude,  ex 
cept  as  a  punishment  for  crime  whereof  the  party  shall  have 
been  duly  convicted,  shall  exist  within  the  United  States,  or 
any  place  subject  to  their  jurisdiction." 

"  Section  2.  Congress  shall  have  power  to  enforce  this  arti 
cle  by  appropriate  legislation." 

This  is  the  form,  in  which  it  was  finally  adopted,  and  as  it 
now  stands  in  the  Constitution.  But  it  was  not  adopted  and 
made  a  part  of  the  Constitution,  for  almost  a  year.  A  course 
of  many  vicissitudes  awaited  it. 

Sumner  did  not  approve  the  language  in  which  it  was  ex 
pressed  and  gave  notice  of  a  substitute.  By  two  other  sec 
tions,  he  proposed  to  strike  out  of  the  Constitution  the  clauses 
theretofore  alleged  to  concern  slavery;  one,  the  clause  in  the 
third  paragraph  of  the  second  section  of  article  one,  concern 
ing  the  apportionment  of  Eepresentatives,  "which  shall  be 
determined  by  adding  to  the  whole  number  of  free  persons  in 
cluding  those  bound  to  a  service  for  a  term  of  years  three-fifths 
of  all  other  persons,"  so  that  with  these  words  stricken  out  it 
should  read,  "  Representatives  and  direct  taxes  shall  be  ap 
portioned  among  the  several  States,  which  may  be  included  in 
this  Union  according  to  their  respective  numbers,  excluding 
Indians  not  taxed ; "  second,  all  of  the  third  paragraph  of  the 
second  section  of  article  four,  reading,  "  No  person  held  to 
service  or  labor  in  one  State,  under  the  laws  thereof,  escaping 
into  another,  shall,  in  consequence  of  any  law  or  regulation 
therein,  be  discharged  from  such  service  or  labor,  but  shall  be 
delivered  up  on  claim  of  the  party  to  whom  such  service  or 
labor  may  IDC  due."  While  the  words  "  slave  "  or  "  slavery  " 
nowhere  appear  in  the  Constitution,  these  two  clauses  had  been 


484  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

held  to  recognize  the  institution  and  make  valid  a  fugitive  slave 
law,  and  he,,  therefore,,  would  have  had  them  stricken  out. 

Sumner  did  not  like  the  words  in  the  amendments  as  re 
ported  by  the  committee :  "  except  as  a  punishment  for  crime 
whereof  the  party  shall  have  been  duly  convicted."  He  argued 
that  the  committee  had  adopted  these  words,  from  the  ordi 
nance  for  the  government  of  the  North-West  Territory,  that 
there  was  a  reason  for  them,  when  then  used,  because  men  could 
then  be  enslaved,  in  certain  parts  of  the  country,  as  a  punish 
ment  for  crime  and  it  was  not,  by  that  ordinance,  proposed 
to  prohibit  such  a  form  of  punishment.  But,  he  argued  that 
what  was  struck  at  here,  was  slavery  as  it  existed,  in  the  slave 
States,  that  what  was  meant  was  well  known,  that  the  words  he 
wished  stricken  out  were  surplusage  and  created  a  doubt  where 
there  should  be  none. 

Trumbull  replied,  that  the  committee  upon  examination  and 
discussion  had  adopted  these  words,  that  he  did  not  know  that 
he  should  have  done  so,  but  a  majority  of  the  committee 
thought  they  were  the  best  words,  that,  at  any  rate,  they  would 
accomplish  the  purpose  and  he  hoped  Sumner  would  withdraw 
his  objection.  It  was  urged  by  Howard,  a  member  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Slavery  and  Freedmen,  that  these  good  old  Anglo- 
Saxon  words,  taken  from  the  ordinance  of  1787,  had  been  re 
peatedly  adjudicated  upon,  so  that  their  meaning  was  well  un 
derstood,  by  the  public  and  the  courts;  and  he  united  in  the 
appeal  to  Sumner  to  waive  a  mere  matter  of  form,  rather  than 
endanger  the  substance  of  the  amendment.  Sumner  yielded 
to  their  appeals  and  withdrew  his  objections,  though  he 
afterwards  regretted  that  he  had  not  insisted  on  striking  out 
the  words,  giving  an  implied  sanction  to  slavery  as  a  punish 
ment  for  crime.  He  feared  they  would  be  made  a  pretext,  for 
imposition,  upon  the  freedmen  of  the  South.  'Subsequent 
events  have  shown  that  his  fears  were  not  without  foundation. 

Within  the  few  years  following  the  war,  some  laws  were 
enacted  by  the  States  that  had  been  in  rebellion  that  are  in 
teresting  in  this  connection.  In  Alabama,  it  was  enacted  that 
stubborn  and  refractory  servants,  and  servants  who  idled  away 
their  time,  might  be  fined  fifty  dollars  and,  in  default  of  pay 
ment,  might  be  hired  out,  by  public  outcry,  on  three  days' 
notice,  for  six  months.  The  reader  will  see,  in  such  a  statute, 
only  a  studied  attempt  to  reduce  the  poor,  ignorant  freedman 
to  slavery,  for  half  the  year,  as  a  pretended  punishment  for 
crime.  In  the  case  of  minors  whose  parents  had  not  the 
means  of  supporting  them,  it  was  made  the  duty  of  the  court  to 
apprentice  them ;  and,  if  the  minor  was  the  child  of  a  freedman, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  485 

the  former  owner  of  the  minor  was  to  have  the  preference.  In 
the  city  of  Mobile,  vagrancy  was  made  punishable  with  con 
finement  to  labor  not  exceeding  six  months,  the  labor  to  be 
designated  by  the  city  officials  for  the  city's  benefit.  The 
labor  was  to  be  done  under  the  authority  of  an  agent  of  the 
city  who  was  to  take  the  persons  so  sentenced  from  their  con 
finement,  watch  them  while  at  labor  and  return  them  before 
sun-down.  If  the  negroes  met  at  night  in  assemblies  to  con 
sider  such  abuses,  under  another  statute  they  might  be  sen 
tenced,  for  attending  such  an  assembly,  to  pay  a  fine  of  fifty  dol 
lars  and  costs  or,  in  default  of  payment,  to  work  for  the  city, 
not  exceeding  six  months.  In  this  way  labor  was  secured  to 
repair  the  streets,  sewers  and  wharfs,  after  the  ravages  of  the 
war.  In  Florida,  the  vagrant  might  be  hired  out  for  twelve 
months  by  the  County  Commissioners,  at  public  outcry,  and 
pay  the  money  thus  secured  into  the  county  treasury,  to  meet 
the  general  expenditures  of  the  county.  In  Louisiana,  a  bill 
was  introduced,  requiring  every  freedman  to  furnish  himself 
a  comfortable  home  and  means  of  support,  within  twenty  days, 
and  on  failure  to  do  so,  to  be  arrested  and  hired  out,  by  public 
advertisement,  for  the  remainder  of  the  year.  If  he  left  his 
employer's  service  without  consent,  he  was  to  be  arrested  and 
assigned  to  labor  on  some  public  work,  without  compensation, 
till  reclaimed.  Many  other  statutes  from  different  States 
might  be  given,  to  illustrate  the  same  tendency. 

The  purpose  of  these  laws  was  apparent.  The  South  had 
failed  in  its  struggle  for  slavery.  But  the  spirit  of  the  people 
that  maintained  the  war  was  unbroken.  What  they  failed  to 
accomplish  by  arms,  they  were  now  willing  to  do  by  legislation. 
These  laws  were  all  aimed  at  the  freedmen,  who  were  left  poor 
and  ignorant,  as  the  result  of  two  hundred  years  of  bondage. 
It  was  now  proposed,  by  systematic  legislation,  of  this  char 
acter,  to  reduce  them  to  a  condition  almost  as  abject  and 
pitiable  as  before.  Of  course  they  were  poor,  of  course  they  had 
no  homes ;  others  had  gathered  where  they  had  sown,  during  all 
these  years,  leaving  them,  out  of  the  hard  measure  of  their 
toils,  only  a  bare  subsistence.  Of  course  they  were  ignorant; 
it  had  been  a  crime  to  teach  them  to  read.  Of  course  they 
were  improvident  and  could  not  manage;  it  had  been  the  law 
of  their  lives  that  others  should  manage  for  them  and  so  man 
age,  too,  that  they  should  have  nothing.  Yet  the  people  that 
had  reduced  them  to  this  condition  now  proposed  to  punish 
them  for  being  so.  It  would  have  been  much  more  to  their 
credit,  if  pitying  the  condition  of  these  freedmen,  they  had 
sought,  in  some  systematic  way,  to  improve  it. 


486  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumner's  experience  in  the  Senate,  before  the  war,  had 
taught  him  the  resourcefulness  of  Southern  statesmen,  in  leg 
islation.  He  wished  carefully  to  guard  against  it,  in  a  matter 
of  so  much  importance,  as  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution 
prohibiting  slavery.  The  punishment  prescribed  in  all  such 
acts  as  enslaved  men  for  a  limited  time  was  a  qualified  form 
of  slavery.  Yet  it  came,  ostensibly  at  least,  within  the  excep 
tion  that  Sumner  wished  to  have  stricken  out  of  the  Thirteenth 
Amendment,  as  proposed  by  the  committee,  forbidding  slavery 
"except  as  a  punishment  for  crime,  whereof  the  party  shall 
have  been  duly  convicted/'  He  would  have  had  it  without  this 
exception.  But  in  giving  way  to  the  preference  of  others,  as 
to  the  form  of  expression,  he  said  he  consoled  himself  with 
the  thought  that,  however  expressed,  the  amendment  would 
endure  to  be  read  with  gratitude. 

As  to  the  two  clauses  that  Sumner  wished  to  have  stricken 
out  of  the  Constitution,  the  first,  as  to  the  apportionment  of 
Representatives,  was  subsequently  taken  out,  by  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment,  the  second,  as  to  the  return  of  fugitives  from 
service,  remains  in  the  Constitution. 

The  joint  resolution  for  the  submission  of  the  Amendment 
passed  the  Senate,  on  the  eighth  day  of  April,  by  the  necessary 
two-thirds  vote.  It  was  not  taken  up  in  the  House  till  the 
last  day  of  May.  A  motion  was  then  made  to  reject  it,  but  this 
motion  failed,  after  an  exciting  debate  lasting  several  days. 
When  the  vote  on  the  resolution  was  taken  on  June  fifteenth 
it  failed  to  receive  the  necessary  two-thirds.  Seeing  this,  at 
the  last  moment,  Mr.  Ashley,  one  of  its  strongest  advocates, 
changed  his  vote  so  as  to  be  able  to  move  a  reconsideration  of 
it.  This  he  did  the  same  day  and  had  his  motion  entered  on 
the  journal,  thus  holding  the  resolution  in  suspense  so  it  could 
be  taken  up,  in  the  House,  at  the  next  session,  and  if  passed 
there,  not  have  to  be  voted  on  by  the  Senate.  No  further 
action  was  taken  on  it,  during  this  session.  But  President 
Lincoln  in  his  message  to  Congress,  at  the  opening  of  the  next 
session,  recommended  its  reconsideration  and  passage,  adding 
that  the  result  of  the  late  election  showed  the  people  were 
favorable  to  it.  On  January  sixth,  1865,  it  was  taken  up  and 
the  debate  on  it  continued,  with  some  interruption  until  Jan 
uary  thirty-first,  when  it  received  the  necessary  two-thirds  vote. 

The  vote  was  anticipated  and  a  large  audience  of  members 
and  spectators  was  present  to  witness  the  result.  As  the  call  of 
the  roll  proceeded,  a  breath-like  silence  pervaded  the  chamber, 
everyone  listening  to  catch  the  vote  of  the  Member,  as  his  name 
was  called.  All  seemed  to  realize  that  the  question,  whether 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  487 

four  million  human  beings  should  be  restored  to  their  birth 
right  of  freedom,  was  a  great  one,  which  hung  on  the  issue  of 
the  hour.  The  issue  had  been  explicitly  stated  in  the  Republi- 
can  platform,  and  Lincoln  had  been  elected  upon  it,  by  an  over 
whelming  majority.  The  battle  fought  over  the  whole  country, 
at  the  polls,  was  now  concentrated  in  this  Chamber,  for  the  final 
issue.  True,  the  Republicans  then  elected  had  not  yet  taken 
office  under  that  election,  but  it  remained  to  be  seen  whether 
those  still  occupying  these  seats  would  bow  to  the  decree  of  the 
people,  whose  will  was  to  be  supreme.  Lincoln  had  plead  with 
them  to  anticipate  the  action  of  the  next  Congress,  that  was 
now  assured.  He  had  reminded  them  of  his  own  Proclamation, 
carrying  freedom  to  the  slaves  of  the  states  now  in  rebellion. 
With  solemn  words,  he  told  them  that,  if  it  was  ever  made  an 
Executive  duty  to  re-enslave  such  persons,  another  and  not  he 
must  be  made  the  instrument  to  perform  it.  The  present 
House  had  voted  down  this  Amendment  once,  it  might  do  so 
again  and  thus  delay,  but  it  could  not  change  the  result. 
Would  it  meet  the  crisis  ? 

When  the  voting  commenced,  it  was  found  there  were  eight 
absentees,  without  pairs,  all  Democrats,  such  men  as  Daniel  W. 
Yoorhees  and  James  F.  McDowell  of  Indiana.  It  was  as 
sumed  that  they  now  favored  the  Amendment,  though  not  pre 
pared  to  so  record  their  votes.  As  the  roll-call  proceeded,  such 
men  as  Homer  A.  Nelson  of  New  York  and  Wells  A.  Hutchens 
of  Ohio  answered,  in  its  favor,  until  ten  Democrats  voted  for 
it,  who  had  not  done  so  before.  When  the  roll-call  was  finished 
the  joint  resolution  had  more  than  the  necessary  two-thirds 
and  the  Amendment  was  ready  to  go  to  the  States  for  ratifica 
tion.  When  the  result  was  announced,  the  scene  was  indescrib 
able.  Members  sprang  upon  their  seats,  cheering  and  shout 
ing,  waving  hats  and  hands  and  canes.  The  galleries  answered 
back  the  shout.  The  whole  chamber  was  in  an  uproar.  All 
efforts  to  restore  order  were  fruitless  and  the  House,  in  spon 
taneous  recognition  of  the  event,  adjourned  for  the  day. 

The  necessary  three-fourths  of  the  States  promptly  ratified 
the  Amendment.  The  result  was  formally  announced  by  the 
Secretary  of  State  December  eighteenth,  1865,  and  the  Amend 
ment  then  became  a  part  of  the  Constitution.  Slavery  was 
abolished. 

There  was  a  reason  for  the  wish  of  the  Republicans  to  have 
the  work  of  the  next  Congress  thus  anticipated.  It  hastened 
emancipation  a  year.  The  recent  successes  of  the  North,  in  the 
field,  indicated  that  the  end  of  the  war  was  near.  Negotia 
tions  for  peace  were  likely  to  be  entered  upon,  at  any  time. 


488  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

When  Congress  opened,  Sherman  was  on  his  victorious  march 
to  the  sea.  When  the  vote  was  taken  in  the  House,  he  was 
leaving  Savannah,  for  his  advance  through  the  Carolinas; 
Thomas  had  annihilated  Hood's  army  at  Nashville ;  and  Grant 
was  holding  Lee  fast  at  Petersburg.  If  a  proposition  came, 
from  the  Confederate  armies,  to  lay  down  their  arms  and, 
from  the  Confederate  States,  to  return  to  their  former  allegi 
ance,  they  would  likely  be  met  by  the  North,  with  open  arms. 
In  the  joy  of  forgiveness,  the  guarantees  of  future  peace  might 
be  overlooked.  Those  who  believed,  like  Lincoln  and  Sumner, 
that  there  could  be  no  permanent  peace  between  the  sections, 
while  slavery  continued,  were  anxious  to  see  it  destroyed  and 
the  legitimate  fruits  of  the  war  secured  by  irreversible  guar 
antees,  before  the  end  came.  This  done,  it  was  hoped  that  a 
peace  then  coming  would  be  a  permanent  one. 

In  this  spirit,  Sumner  was  busy  upon  other  measures  that 
concerned  the  colored  race,  while  this  Amendment  was  pending 
in  the  House  and  with  the  States.  In  answer  to  a  suggestion 
of  Sherman,  in  the  Senate  one  day,  that  the  Constitutional 
Amendment  was  the  main  proposition,  Sumner  retorted,  "  The 
main  proposition,  Sir,  is  to  strike  slavery  wherever  you  can  hit 
it  and  I  tell  the  Senator  he  will  not  accomplish  his  purpose  if 
he  contents  himself  merely  with  a  constitutional  amendment." 
Sumner  believed  in  the  equality  of  the  races  before  the  law. 

He  made  a  protracted  struggle  in  the  Senate  to  equalize  the 
pay  of  colored  troops.  Some  of  them  had  enlisted  under  acts 
that  had  made  no  distinction  between  them  and  white  soldiers. 
The  white  soldiers  received  thirteen  dollars  per  month,  but  by 
an  order  of  the  War  Department,  the  colored  men  were  paid, 
under  a  subsequent  act,  only  ten.  It  was  a  question  of  con 
struction  of  the  two  laws.  Sumner  insisted,  that  all  soldiers 
enlisted  under  one  law,  should  be  paid  the  same  and  that  an 
act  passed  subsequently  to  their  enlistment  could  not  change  the 
rights  of  the  colored  man.  Some  Massachusetts  troops  were  in 
terested  and  that  State  firmly  convinced  of  the  justice  of  their 
claim,  Governor  Andrew  having  assisted  in  their  enlistment, 
offered  to  pay  them  the  difference.  But  some  of  the  troops  de 
clined  to  so  receive  it,  insisting  they  were  to  be  paid  by  the 
United  States.  The  matter  was  first  canvassed,  by  Sumner  and 
Wilson,  before  the  War  Department,  and  Secretary  Stanton, 
at  last,  became  restive  under  their  importunities.  It  was  then 
brought  before  the  Senate,  in  an  effort  to  amend  the  law  caus 
ing  the  doubt.  Sumner  spoke  several  times  upon  it.  The 
matter  was  finally  referred  by  resolution,  to  the  Attorney-Gen- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  489 

eral,  who  construed  the  law  in  favor  of  the  colored  troops  and 
they  were  paid  the  same  as  white  soldiers,  who  had  enlisted 
with  them. 

Another  troublesome  question  upon  which  Sumner  spent 
much  labor  at  this  time  was  the  claims  against  the  Government 
for  French  spoliations  during  the  Revolutionary  War.  It  was 
an  old  subject,  that  had  often  before  troubled  Congress,  and 
was  destined  to  trouble  it  still  longer.  The  claims  were  in  favor 
of  private  parties  for  damages  done  to  American  shipping,  by 
cruisers  and  other  armed  vessels  of  France,  in  violation  of  the 
law  of  nations  and  existing  treaties.  Claims  of  the  same  kind 
had  been  made,  by  our  Government,  against  other  European 
nations  and  had  been  paid  and  the  money  thus  received  dis 
tributed  to  those  entitled.  It  was  insisted  that  the  Colonies  had 
assumed  the  claims  against  France,  in  the  adjustment  made 
between  the  two  countries,  at  the  close  of  that  war.  This  being 
disputed,  the  claims  had  never  been  paid.  Forty-one  times  the 
subject,  had  been  reported  upon  by  Committees  of  the  Senate 
and  House,  every  time  favorably,  except  in  three  of  the  earliest 
reports,  the  third,  fourth  and  fifth.  Among  the  eminent  men 
who  had  made  the  favorable  reports  were  Edward  Livingston, 
Edward  Everett,  Daniel  Webster,  Caleb  Gushing,  Charles  J. 
Ingersoll,  John  M.  Clayton  and  Rufus  Choate.  Sumner  now, 
as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  went  into 
the  matter,  with  his  customary  thoroughness,  and  made  a  re 
port  of  almost  one  hundred  pages,  in  which  he  reviewed  the 
whole  subject  and  urged  an  appropriation  of  not  exceeding  five 
million  dollars,  to  pay  the  claims.  Three  thousand  extra  copies 
of  the  report  were  ordered  printed.  It  stands  as  the  most  ex 
haustive  discussion  of  the  subject  ever  made.  It  was  twice 
after,  while  Sumner  was  a  member  of  the  Committee,  adopted 
as  its  report,  on  this  subject,  and  so  returned  to  the  Senate ;  and 
twice  more,  by  the  Committee,  after  Sumner's  death.  An  ap 
propriation  was  finally  made  for  the  payment  of  the  claims  and 
they  were  paid. 

The  position  of  Sumner,  upon  another  measure,  at  this 
Session,  is  interesting.  He  opposed  the  taxation  of  national 
banks,  by  the  States,  and  offered  an  amendment  to  the  law  for 
bidding  any  State  tax  upon  them,  except  as  to  the  real  estate 
they  might  hold.  He  believed  the  taxation  of  these  banks 
should  be  exclusively  in  the  hands  of  Congress  for  fear  the 
States,  if  the  power  of  taxation  were  continued  to  them,  might 
undertake,  in  some  crisis,  to  destroy  them.  In  this  view,  he 
was  supported  by  Secretary  Chase,  in  a  communication  ad- 


490  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

dressed  by  him  to  the  Senate  Finance  Committee,  and  by  some 
Senators.  But  his  amendment  was  voted  down.  The  States 
have  always  had  the  right  to  tax  these  banks  and  experience  has 
not  yet  shown  that  it  was  unwise  to  confer  it  upon  them.  To 
withdraw  from  State  taxation  the  vast  amount  of  capital  in 
vested  in  these  institutions  would  transfer  an  undue  burden  to 
other  classes  of  property. 

Late  in  the  evening  of  Saturday,  July  second,  a  resolution 
was  offered,  proposing  that  Congress  adjourn  on  the  following 
Monday  at  noon.  Sumner  was  opposed  to  the  resolution  and 
spoke  against  it.  He  reminded  Senators  that  they  were  in  the 
midst  of  a  gigantic  war  and  that  important  legislation  still  re 
mained  to  be  acted  upon,  that  the  army  must  be  sustained  and 
that  measures  for  increased  taxation  should  be  debated,  that 
$100,000,000  more  was  said  to  be  needed  and  the  people  were 
asking  taxation  to  provide  for  it.  He  reminded  them  that  until 
1856  there  had  been  no  adjournment  before  August  and  that 
in  1850,  the  summer  of  the  passage  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  law, 
there  had  been  no  adjournment  until  September  thirtieth; 
that,  if  for  slavery  Congress  could  endure  the  heat  of  summer 
and  autumn,  surely  now,  for  the  sake  of  freedom,  they  could 
continue  in  session  longer  than  July  fourth ;  that  the  Senators 
were  paid  then  eight  dollars  per  day,  now  a  salary  of  three 
thousand  dollars  per  year;  that  it  was  humiliating  to  think 
that  so  long  as  they  were  paid  a  per  diem,  they  were  willing  to 
stay  late,  but  when  paid  by  the  year,  they  could  not  endure  the 
heat.  He  sympathized  with  the  wish  of  others  to  be  away.  If 
he  were  to  take -counsel  of  his  own  personal  comfort  he  too 
would  be  glad  to  be  gone. 

"  Born  on  the  sea-shore,"  he  said,  "  accustomed  to  the  sea 
air,  I  am  less  prepared  than  many  of  my  friends  to  endure  the 
climate  here.  I  feel  sensibly  its  sultry  heats,  and  I  pant  for  the 
taste  of  salt  in  the  atmosphere.  Nor  am  I  insensible  to  other 
influences.  What  little  remains  to  me  of  home  and  friendship 
is  far  away  from  here — where  I  was  born.  But  home,  friend 
ship,  and  sea-shore  must  not  tempt  me  at  this  hour." 

In  that  short  expression :  "  What  little  remains  to  me  of 
home  and  friendship  is  far  away,"  is  the  first  note  that  comes 
to  us,  in  his  works,  of  the  sadness  and  loneliness  of  life  that 
afterwards  dwelt  upon  him  with  peculiar  heaviness.  It  seemed 
at  last  to  grow  into  a  longing  himself  to  be  away.  On  the  sixth 
of  the  preceding  October,  1863,  his  brother  George  had  died 
of  paralysis.  He  had  been  first  stricken,  two  years  before.  Of 
all  the  large  family  that  had  once  gathered  around  his  father's 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  491 

table,  Sumner  alone  of  the  sons  remained,  and  with  him  was 
his  mother  and  only  one  sister,  Julia.  The  sister  was  married 
and  away  in  a  home  of  her  own.  The  feeling  between  Charles, 
and  George  had  been  unusually  tender.  Charles  had  remained 
constantly  near  him  during  his  last  summer  and  was  present 
when  he  died. 


CHAPTER    XXXI 

RECONSTRUCTION   UNDER   LINCOLN IN   LOUISIANA  AND  ARKAN 
SAS NO  BUST  OF  C.  J.  TANEY NEGRO  SUFFRAGE FREED- 

MEN'S  BUREAU RELATIONS  OF  LINCOLN  AND  SUMNER — 

LINCOLN'S  DEATH 

I  HAVE  reserved  until  this  place  the  mention  of  some  work  of 
Sumner  on  reconstruction.  It  would  naturally  have  come  ear 
lier  in  strict  order  of  time.  But  it  will  be  more  readily  under 
stood  if  the  whole  subject  is  treated  together  rather  than  in 
detached  portions,  as  it  came  up,  from  time  to  time  under  the 
administration  of  Lincoln. 

As  the  war  neared  its  close,  the  question  of  the  relation  of  the 
seceding  States  to  the  Union  became  one  of  serious  importance. 
It  had  first  made  its  appearance  early  in  the  war  when  the  loyal 
portion  of  Virginia,  now  West  Virginia,  refused  to  follow  the 
rest  of  the  State  into  rebellion.  The  question  had  seemed 
simple  enough  of  solution  then,  for  the  nation  was  anxious  to 
retain  as  much  as  possible  of  the  slave  territory  from  the  Con 
federacy;  and  the  part  that  remained  was  occupied  by  loyal 
people,  akin  in  manners  of  life  to  the  North.  Congress  had 
created  it  a  separate  State  and  admitted  it  to  the  Union.  The 
new  state,  under  a  constitution,  formed  in  accordance  with  the 
act  of  Congress  had  elected  state  officers;  and  Senators  and 
Members  of  Congress  to  represent  them,  were  sent  to  Wash 
ington.  These  had  presented  their  credentials  and  been  ad 
mitted  to  their  seats.  Coming  when  they  did,  they  had 
strengthened  the  hands  of  Congress  and  the  President.  The 
men  sent  to  Washington,  save  a  certain  leaning  towards  slavery 
to  be  expected  from  citizens  of  a  slave  State,  were  as  loyal,  and 
as  cordial,  in  their  support  of  war  measures,  as  any  they  found 
there.  The  new  State  had  given  pledge  of  its  sympathy  for 
the  North,  by  placing  in  its  constitution  a  provision  for  the 
abolition  of  slavery  and  adopting  it,  by  a  popular  vote.  But 
notice,  the  admission  of  the  new  State  had  been  by  concurrent 
act  of  Congress  and  the  President,  not  by  the  President  alone. 

There  was  this  difference,  however,  between  the  conditions  in 
the  admission  of  West  Virginia  and  those  attending  the  recon 
struction  of  the  States  in  secession.  The  white  people  of  the 
former  were  loyal,  while  those  of  the  latter  were  not.  The 

492 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  493 

former  had  refused  to  enter  into  the  Rebellion,  had  held  a 
separate  convention,  when  the  ordinance  of  secession  was 
adopted  and  had  repudiated  this  action  on  the  part  of  the 
balance  of  the  State.  They  had  raised  soldiers  and  had  assisted 
in  fighting  the  battles  of  the  Union.  The  others  had  seceded 
and  had  raised  and  maintained  armies  to  destroy  the  Union. 
They  were  in  favor  of  slavery  and  had  sought  to  perpetuate  it. 
If  compelled  at  last  to  give  it  up,  it  had  only  been  at  the  point  of 
the  bayonet.  If  readmitted  to  representation  in  Congress,  judg 
ing  from  all  the  past,  they  would  be  found  voting  to  cripple  the 
efforts  of  the  North  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  the  freedmen 
of  the  South.  So  far  as  they  could,  they  would  frustrate  the 
efforts  of  the  North,  to  restore  the  National  authority  in  the 
South.  It  was  feared  that  a  warring,  contentious,  dissatisfied 
element  would  be  restored  to  its  old  place  in  Washington.  At 
home  in  the  South,  the  colored  people,  without  property  and 
without  influence  would  be  left  without  any  means  of  protec 
tion.  It  was  important  that  having  been  given  their  freedom, 
they  should  be  given  the  means  of  protecting  it. 

But  President  Lincoln  was  favorable  to  the  reorganization 
of  the  States  in  rebellion,  as  fast  as  could  be,  consistently  with 
the  interests  of  the  loyal  North.  A  government  in  these  States, 
by  military  oligarchy  longer  than  required  by  the  necessities  of 
the  case,  would  hardly  be  regarded  favorably  by  an  able  lawyer, 
who  had  thought  much  upon  constitutional  questions;  and  it 
was  abhorrent  to  his  sense  of  justice.  He  was  equally  opposed 
to  a  government  inaugurated  there  by  political  adventurers, 
who  had  followed  the  march  of  our  armies  and  were  ready  to 
fill  any  positions  of  place  or  power  that  might  be  offered.  He 
realized  that  we  did  not  particularly  need  Members  of  Con 
gress  to  assist  in  the  work  of  legislation  at  Washington.  That 
work  was  being  done,  in  the  main,  satisfactorily  enough  to  us 
But  he  would  like  to  see  citizens  of  the  South,  of  sufficient 
courage  to  boldly  assert  that  they  were  opposed  to  the  mad 
career  of  rebellion,  and  these  in  sufficient  numbers  to  organize 
and  maintain  loyal  State  governments.  It  would  furnish  ac 
tual  demonstration  of  the  failing  fortunes  of  the  Confederacy. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  one  of  the  President's  purposes,  in 
reconstruction,  was  to  encourage  loyal  citizens  of  the  South  to 
assert  their  loyalty  and  aid  in  the  re-establishment  of  their 
States.  It  would  strengthen  their  position  by  awakening  a 
feeling  of  loyalty  in  others.  It  would  form  a  nucleus  about 
which  opposition  to  the  Confederacy  might  unite,  and  aid  in 
destroying  its  hopes  of  success.  He  well  knew  that  many  of  the 
people  of  the  South  had  not  favored  rebellion,  but  had  been 


494  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

carried  along  in  the  mad  career  of  their  more  powerful  neigh 
bors.  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  the  Yice-President  of  the  Con 
federacy,  had  been  one  of  this  class.  He  had  advised  against 
secession  and  had  opposed  it,  in  a  strong  public  speech.  He 
had  only  gone  with  his  section,  at  last,  because  he  could  not 
control  it.  There  was  no  hope  of  course  now  of  reaching  him. 
But  others  of  his  class  were  not  holding  office  under  the  Con 
federacy  and  were  not  so  prominently  identified  with  the  South. 
The  President  hoped  that  they  might  be  reached  and  united 
and  encouraged  to  do  a  good  work  in  discouraging  rebellion 
and  bringing  back  the  section  to  its  former  allegiance.  He  felt 
that  there  was  a  duty  resting  upon  loyal  Southern  men  that 
they  should  perform.  He  had  a  good  deal  of  impatience  with 
such  of  them  as  seemed  to  think  the  United  States  owed  them 
protection  and  safety,  but  that  they  owed  the  United  States 
nothing  in  return. 

Writing  of  one  of  this  class  living  in  Louisiana,  who  had  com 
plained  that,  though  loyal,  the  trade  and  travel  of  such  as  him 
self  had  been  interfered  with,  by  the  blockade,  Lincoln  said: 
"  Mr.  Durant  speaks  of  no  duty,  apparently  thinks  of  none, 
resting  upon  Southern  Union  men.  He  even  thinks  it  inju 
rious  to  the  Union  cause  that  they  should  be  restrained  in  trade 
and  passage  without  taking  sides.  They  are  to  touch  neither  a 
sail  nor  a  pump,  live  merely  as  passengers  ('  dead-heads  ?  at 
that)  to  be  carried  snug  and  dry  throughout  the  storm  and 
safely  landed  right  side  up.  Nay,  more,  even  a  mutineer  is  to 
go  untouched,  lest  these  sacred  passengers  receive  an  accidental 
wound.  Of  course  the  Eebellion  will  never  be  suppressed  in 
Louisiana,  if  the  professed  Union  men  there,  will  neither  help 
to  do  it  nor  permit  the  Government  to  do  it,  without  their 
help." 

It  was  over  the  State  of  Louisiana  that  the  first  question  of 
reconstruction  arose.  In  April,  1862,  Admiral  Farragut  had 
reduced  the  Eebel  fortifications  on  the  lower  Mississippi  and 
captured  New  Orleans.  Thenceforward  the  city  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  United  States  soldiers.  Thus  encouraged,  the 
loyal  citizens  of  Louisiana  began  to  take  thought  of  reorganiz 
ing  the  State  and,  under  a  proclamation,  by  the  Union  Military 
Governor,  for  an  election,  had  held  one  in  December  of  that 
year.  Benjamin  F.  Flanders  and  Michael  Hahn,  two  old  resi 
dents  of  the  State,  were  chosen  Members  of  Congress.  They 
had  accordingly  presented  their  credentials  to  that  House  and, 
without  much  discussion,  it  had  admitted  them  to  their  seats. 
No  Senators  had  been  elected  and,  of  course,  each  House  being 
the  judge  of  its  own  elections,  the  question  of  eligibility  had 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  495 

not  been  discussed  by  the  Senate.  This  was,  however,  the  first 
crude  effort  at  real  reconstruction  and,  as  the  sequel  showed,  it 
was  a  mistake.  It  was  admitting  reconstruction,  at  the  instance 
of  the  President,  and  permitting  it  to  be  consummated,  with 
Congress  having  no  voice  in  it  save  to  vote,  each  House,  on  the 
admission  of  Members,  returned  to  it.  The  result  of  it  was  to 
mislead  both  President  Lincoln  and  President  Johnson,  as  to 
the  extent  of  their  powers.  It  led  President  Lincoln  into  be 
lieving  that  reconstruction  at  the  instance  of  the  President 
would  be  recognized  by  the  Senate  and  it  brought  about  a  strug 
gle  between  him  and  that  House,  in  which  he  was  defeated.  It 
misled  President  Johnson  into  believing  that  the  authority  of 
the  President,  as  assumed  by  his  predecessor  and  apparently 
conceded  by  the  House,  was  greater  than  it  was  in  reality.  It 
caused  the  first  clash  between  him  and  Congress,  and  in  large 
measure  contributed  to  his  impeachment. 

The  action  upon  the  credentials  of  Flanders  and  Hahn  had 
not,  however,  been  taken  without  some  misgivings  on  the  part 
of  the  lower  House.  But,  like  the  admission  of  West  Virginia, 
it  came  at  a  time  when  the  fortunes  of  the  North  were  at  the 
lowest  ebb,  just  after  the  bloody  battle  of  Antietam,  when  both 
Congress  and  the  President  were  absorbed  in  providing  men 
and  money  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  war. 

The  next  step  was  taken  when  President  Lincoln,  in  his 
Message  to  Congress,  in  December,  1863,  recommended  a  defi 
nite  plan  of  reconstruction.  He  accompanied  his  Message  with 
a  Proclamation  setting  forth  his  plan.  It  proposed  a  full  par 
don  to  all  persons  who  had  been  in  rebellion,  except  certain 
classes  who  were  deemed  especially  guilty  because  they  had 
abandoned  judicial,  congressional,  naval  or  military  offices 
under  the  United  States  to  enter  the  Confederacy,  or  who  had 
held  high  civil  or  military  offices  under  the  Confederate  gov 
ernment,  or  had  been  guilty  of  cruelty  towards  United  States 
colored  troops  when  captured,  treating  them  otherwise  than  as 
prisoners  of  war.  All  persons  not  thus  excepted  from  pardon 
were  to  be  restored  to  citizenship  upon  their  taking  an  oath  to 
support  and  defend  the  Constitution  and  abide  by  all  laws,  and 
proclamations,  made  during  the  war  respecting  slaves,  until  leg 
ally  modified.  If  a  sufficient  number  of  such  persons  in  any 
State  in  rebellion,  voted,  to  cast  one-tenth  of  the  vote  that  was 
cast  at  the  Presidential  election  of  1860,  the  government  thus 
established  was  to  be  recognized  as  that  of  the  State.  The  Proc 
lamation,  however,  provided  that  the  eligibility  of  persons 
elected  to  the  Senate  and  House  must  be  determined  by  these 
Houses  respectively. 


49G  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

A  change  had  now  taken  place  in  the  fortunes  of  the  Xorth. 
Vicksburg  had  been  captured  by  Grant  and  the  Mississippi 
River  was  now  open  from  its  source  to  its  mouth  and  patrolled 
by  Union  gunboats.  The  Confederacy  was  divided  in  twain, 
the  part  of  it  that  lay  west  of  the  Mississippi  being  completely 
separated  from  the  rest  and  destined  never  to  be  reunited  under 
that  government.  Gettysburg  had  been  fought  and  won.  These 
events,  with  the  failing  fortunes  of  the  Confederacy  elsewhere, 
were  strengthening  the  hearts  of  Southern  Union  men.  In 
Louisiana  a  convention  was  held  and  after  that  an  election, 
whereby  Michael  Halm  was  chosen  Governor.  Members  of 
Congress  were  also  elected.  Arkansas  had  elected  a  Governor 
and  Members  of  Congress.  Both  States  accomplished  this  by 
the  requisite  ten  per  cent,  vote  and  likewise  adopted  Constitu 
tions  abolishing  slavery.  Several  States  chose  United  States 
Senators.  The  Senators  from  Arkansas  were  the  first  to  present 
their  credentials  at  Washington  and  ask  to  be  seated.  The  issue 
was  thus  fairly  presented.  Everything  had  been  done  in  ac 
cordance  with  the  President's  Proclamation.  Would  the  two 
Houses  of  Congress  acquiesce,  and  vote  to  seat  the  Representa 
tives  and  Senators?  President  Lincoln,  relying  on  the  previous 
action  of  the  lower  House  upon  the  credentials  of  Flanders  and 
Hahn,  believed  they  would. 

But  the  feeling  of  some  of  the  Members  had  changed  in  the 
meantime.  Within  a  few  days  after  the  publication  of  the 
President's  Message  and  Proclamation,  Sumner  referring  to 
the  plan  of  reconstruction  there  set  forth,  wrote :  "  Any  plan 
which  fastens  emancipation  beyond  recall  will  suit  me,"  thus 
making  emancipation  the  one  single  requisite  in  his  eyes.  On 
the  eighth  of  February,  1864,  two  months  after  the  Proclama 
tion,  he  introduced  a  series  of  resolutions  in  the  Senate,  for  the 
purpose  of  defining  its  position  upon  the  question  of  reconstruc 
tion.  In  these  resolutions  he  took  the  same  position  as  in  his 
letter  to  Bright  and  he  made  it  emphatic  that  no  reconstruction 
was  to  be  considered  that  did  not  secure  emancipation  in  the 
reconstructed  States.  In  these  resolutions  he  insisted  that  a 
solemn  duty  was  cast  upon  Congress  to  see  that  no  rebel  State 
was  prematurely  restored  *  *  *  until  all  proper  safe-guards  were 
established,  so  that  loyal  citizens,  including  the  new-made  freed- 
men  could  not  be  molested  *  *  *  and  especially  that  no  man 
there  could  be  made  a  slave."  In  the  last  of  these  resolutions 
he  defined  how  this  freedom  was  to  be  secured :  "  the  constitu 
tion  thereof  must  be  so  amended  as  to  prohibit  slavery  every 
where  within  the  limits  of  the  Republic."  Here  was  eman 
cipation  to  be  secured  by  Constitutional  Amendment,  under  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  497 

supervision  of  Congress,  in  the  reconstructed  States  before  they 
should  be  allowed  to  retake  their  position  as  States.  This  was 
the  highest  ground  that  Sumner  assumed,  up  to  the  time  of 
President  Lincoln's  Proclamation.  But  note,  there  was  no 
mention  in  it  of  suffrage  to  the  colored  race,  as  one  of  the  pre 
requisites.  Sumner  himself  had  not  yet  advanced  to  this  posi 
tion.  But  he  was  travelling  in  this  direction. 

On  the  thirtieth  of  March,  1864,  the  Senate  was  considering 
a  bill  already  passed  by  the  House,  to  provide  a  temporary 
government  for  the  Territory  of  Montana,  'when  Wilkinson,  of 
Minnesota,  moved  to  amend  the  clause  relating  to  the  qualifica 
tion  to  vote.  As  the  House  had  passed  the  bill,  the  qualification 
stood  "  every  white  male  inhabitant."  The'  amendment  pro 
posed  was  to  make  it  "  every  free  male  citizen  of  the  United 
States  and  those  who  have  declared  their  intention  to  become 
such."  A  debate  arose  over  this  amendment.  Reverdy  John 
son  said  the  word  "  citizen  "  as  thus  used  was  not  applicable  to 
"  black  men  "  because  the  Supreme  Court  had  held  in  the  Bred 
Scott  case  that  a  person  of  African  descent  is  not  a  citizen. 
Wilkinson  said  he  was  willing  to.  let  the  amendment  stand  as  it 
was,  let  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  be  what  it  may. 
Sumner  remarked  that  he  hoped  Congress  would  proceed,  with 
out  respect  to  a  decision  that  had  disgraced  the  country  and 
ought  to  be  expunged  from  its  jurisprudence.  Johnson  fol 
lowed  him  at  length  in  a  eulogy  of  Chief  Justice  Taney,  who 
had  delivered  the  majority  opinion  in  the  Dred  Scott  case  and 
was  from  his  own  State.  He  took  Sumner  to  task  for  his  want 
of  respect  for  the  Supreme  Court.  Sumner  replied  that  he  had 
been  taught  that  two  and  two  made  four  and  if  a  tribunal 
honored  like  that  Court  declared  they  made  five  he  claimed  the 
right  to  dissent,  that  he  entered  a  standing  protest  against  that 
"  atrocious  judgment "  which  was  "  as  absurd  and  irrational 
as  such  a  reversal  of  the  multiplication  table,"  that  it  "was 
false  in  law  and  also  false  in  the  history  with  which  it  sought 
to  maintain  its  false  law."  Johnson  had  referred  to  the  honored 
character  of  the  Court  and  the  great  names  that  had  been  asso 
ciated  with  it  in  the  past.  This  reference  to  the  old  Court 
touched  a  chord  that  had  vibrated,  in  his  youthful  days,  when 
on  his  first  visit  to  Washington,  Judge  Story  had  opened  to 
him  an  association  with  the  Members  of  that  body,  and  Sumner 
replied : 

"  But  the  Senator  wandered  into  eulogy  of  that  old  Supreme 
Court,  now  departed,  when  Marshall  was  Chief  Justice,  and 
from  the  past  claimed  consideration  for  the  present.  Sir,  I 
have  been  no  careless  student  of  that  court  in  its  great  and 


498  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

palmy  days.  I  know  the  learning,  wisdom  and  ability  of  its 
judgments,  and  am  proud  that  there  are  such  pages  in  the 
jurisprudence  of  my  country.  My  sentiments  towards  the  court 
of  that  day  are  warmed,  also,  by  personal  experience.  It  is 
among  the  cherished  reminiscences  of  early  life,  that  I  was 
privileged  to  know,  as  a  youth  might  know,  the  illustrious 
magistrate,  whom  the  Senator  praises  so  well.  He  received  me 
at  his  table,  and  allowed  me  to  accompany  him  in  his  morning 
walks  to  the  court-room.  He  was  a  venerable  character.  But 
I  pray  the  Senator  not  to  claim  for  the  Dred  Scott  decision 
any  of  the  reverence  justly  belonging  to  his  name.  There  is  no 
question  of  tribute  to  Chief  Justice  Marshall,  or  respect  for  the 
tribunal  while  he  presided  over  it.  The  Dred  Scott  decision 
is  more  noticed  from  contrast  with  all  that  is  good  and  great 
in  the  decisions  of  other  days.  It  is  sad  that  the  tribunal  that 
had  established  such  an  authority  among  us  should  do  an  act 
by  which  its  authority  has  been  endangered." 

Johnson  replied  insisting  he  had  not  wished  to  offend  Sumner 
and  confessing  his  -personal  regard  for  him  as  well  as  acknowl 
edging  the  courtesy  he  had  received  at  his  hands.  But  he  still 
insisted  that  he  must  place  the  authority  of  Chief  Justice 
Taney  higher  than  Sumner  upon  a  question  of  constitutional 
law.  Hale,  of  New  Hampshire,  to  the  merriment  of  the  Senate, 
added  that  he  would  have  to  differ  from  Sumner,  that  while 
he  did  not  think  any  better  than  he  did  of  the  Dred  Scott  deci 
sion  and  agreed  also  that  it  was  an  outrage  upon  the  civiliza 
tion  of  the  age  and  a  libel  upon  the  law,  he  could  not  agree  with 
Sumner  in  thinking  it  was  a  disgrace  to  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States.  To  this  length  had  one  decision  carried 
Senators  in  their  estimate  of  the  court.  The  conclusion  gravely 
reached  by  so  high  a  court  that  a  man  by  reason  of  his  color 
could  not  be  a  "  citizen  "  seems  amusing  still. 

Chief  Justice  Taney  died,  during  the  coming  recess  of  Con 
gress.  At  the  following  session,  a  joint  resolution  for  a  bust  of 
him,  to  be  placed  in  the  Supreme  Court  Eoom,  was  introduced 
by  Trumbull,  of  Illinois.  It  was  vigorously  opposed  by  Sum 
ner,  Wilson,  Hale  and  Wade;  but  was  supported  by  Johnson, 
Trumbull  and  Carlile  of  West  Virginia.  The  debate  over  it 
was  exceedingly  acrimonious;  and  personalities  were  indulged 
in,  on  both  sides.  The  proposition  was  opposed,  on  the  ground 
of  the  Dred  Scott  decision ;  which  was  characterized  "  as  the 
greatest  crime  in  the  judicial  annals  of  the  country."  Johnson 
believed  the  decision  was  right  and  defended  it.  Sumner  re 
plied  that  in  listening  to  Johnson  he  was  "reminded  of  a 
character  known  to  the  Roman  Church  who  always  figures  at 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  499 

the  canonization  of  a  saint  as  the  Devil's  Advocate  ";  and  added 
that  "  Taney  should  never  be  recognized  as  a  saint  by  any  vote 
of  Congress/'  if  he  could  prevent  it.  It  was  apparent  that  the 
opposition,  under  Sumner's  lead,  would  defeat  it;  and  it  was, 
therefore,  abandoned.  The  incident  illustrates  the  height  feel 
ing  was  running  at  the  time,  on  the  question  of  slavery. 
Though  undoubtedly  wrong  in  this  decision,  Chief  Justice 
Taney  was  a  wise  and  able  judge,  who  as  the  head  of  the  court 
for  twenty-eight  years,  one  of  the  longest  careers  in  its  his 
tory,  had  added  to  its  renown.  The  vote  of  a  bust  did  not  neces 
sarily  mean  an  endorsement  of  all  his  work.  The  busts  are 
placed  there  simply  as  memorials  of  the  deceased.  Nine  years 
later,  when  feeling  had  softened  and  all  who  had  opposed  the 
resolution  were  gone  from  the  Senate,  save  Sumner  alone,  and 
he  was  detained  from  his  seat  by  sickness,  a  resolution  to  place 
in  the  Court  Room  busts  of  Taney,  and  Chase  who  had  recently 
died,  was  passed  unanimously.  The  Dred  Scott  decision  had 
never  been  formally  reversed  by  the  court,  but  no  one  regarded 
it  as  binding.  Sumner  himself  had  moved  the  admission  of 
the  first  colored  attorney  to  the  bar  of  that  court  and  the  court 
had  admitted  him  to  practice,  thus  affirming  the  conclusion, 
that  others  had  reached,  that  the  black  man  was  a  "  citizen." 

Wilkinson  was  therefore  safe  enough,  when  he  declared  he 
was  willing  to  let  his  amendment  to  the  bill  to  provide  a  govern 
ment  for  the  Territory  of  Montana  stand,  as  entitling  "  free 
male  (  citizens ' "  to  vote.  The  amendment  proposed  by  him 
was  adopted  by  the  Senate;  and  the  bill  was  then  passed  as 
amended.  But  the  House  refused  to  concur  in  the  amendment. 
A  bill  was  finally  passed  by  both  Houses  limiting  the  right  to 
vote  substantially  as  first  proposed  to  "  white  male  inhabitants." 
So  the  first  battle  for  colored  suffrage  was  lost. 

The  question  next  came  up  when  the  Senate  had  before  it, 
a  bill  to  change  the  charter  of  the  city  of  Washington.  Cowen 
of  Pennsylvania  moved  to  amend  the  bill,  by  inserting  the  word 
"  white  "  before  "  male,"  so  as  to  confine  the  right  to  vote  in  the 
city  to  white  male  citizens.  Sumner  spoke  against  the  amend 
ment,  saying  that  the  refusal  of  this  right  was  an  odious  prej 
udice  against  the  black  man,  bequeathed  by  slavery.  He  in 
sisted  that  in  the  early  days  of  the  Republic  black  men  had 
been  allowed  to  vote.  He  called  attention  to  the  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  North  Carolina,  found  in  4  Devereaux 
and  Battle  Eeports  at  page  25  where  the  court  says  that  "  it 
is  a  matter  of  universal  notoriety  that  under  it  (the  original 
constitution  of  the  State)  free  persons  without  regard  to  color 
claimed  and  exercised  the  franchise  until  it  was  taken  away 


500  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

from  free  men  of  color  a  few  years  since  by  our  amended 
constitution."  "  Her  most  eminent  magistrate,"  said  Sumner, 
"  the  late  Mr.  Justice  Gaston,  accomplished  as  a  jurist  and  as  a 
man,  whom  I  remember  well,  in  most  agreeable  personal  inter 
course,  laid  down  the  law  of  his  State  in  these  emphatic  words." 
This  famous  Judge  had  himself,  as  a  member  of  the  Constitu 
tional  Convention,  of  his  State,  opposed  the  proposition  to  de 
prive  free  colored  men  of  the  right  to  vote.  Sumner  had  met 
him  at  Montreal,  in  1836,  when  on  an  excursion  in  Canada. 
He  declared  that  he  did  not  think  any  one  on  the  floor  of  the 
Senate  could  feel  humbled,  if  his  judgment  was  postponed  to 
that  of  Judge  Gaston  of  North  Carolina,  who  had  declared  that, 
according  to  the  constitutional  law  of  human  rights,  colored 
persons  are  citizens. 

Sumner's  mind  upon  the  question  of  suffrage  was  now  made 
up.  "  I  shall  deem  it  my  duty,"  he  said,  "  to  vote  against  all 
propositions  creating  any  discrimination  of  color.  At  this 
moment  of  revolution,  when  our  country  needs  the  blessing  of 
Almighty  God  and  the  strong  arms  of  all  her  children,  this  is 
not  the  time  for  us  solemnly  to  enact  injustice." 

With  this,  the  bill  to  change  the  charter  of  Washington  was 
dropped.  But  on  the  twenty-fourth  of  May,  1864,  two  weeks 
after  Sumner  made  this  declaration,  Wade,  of  Ohio,  offered  a 
joint  resolution  to  improve  the  registration  law  of  Washington. 
It  retained  the  old  exclusion  on  account  of  color.  Sumner 
offered  an  amendment,  to  forbid  this  exclusion.  Wade  said  it 
was  not  his  purpose  to  go  into  the  question  of  suffrage,  but 
simply  to  secure  a  needed  change  in  the  law.  Sumner  answered 
that  it  continued  the  old  rule  founded  on  color  and  that  he 
could  not  sanction  it,  that  he  would  regret  to  see  his  amend 
ment  defeat  the  bill,  as  it  was  suggested  it  would,  for  he  sin 
cerely  wished  its  passage,  but  he  could  see  no  reason  for  a  dis 
crimination  of  color,  if  white  persons  were  deprived  of  their 
rights,  by  a  failure  to  pass  the  bill,  so  were  colored  persons,  by 
a  failure  to  pass  his  amendment.  And  he  asked  with  some 
point,  "which  has  been  kept  out  the  longest?  I  am  for  the 
rights  of  both  to  the  end  that  we  may  have  at  last,  in  the 
national  capitol,  Equality  before  the  law."  He  again  expressed 
the  determination  to  miss  no  opportunity  to  assert  the  rights 
of  the  oppressed  race.  Mr.  Harlan  moved  to  add  a  limitation, 
granting  the  right  of  suffrage  to  those  colored  men,  who  had 
borne  arms,  in  the  service  of  the  country  and  had  been  honor 
ably  discharged.  But  both  propositions  to  grant  the  right  to 
vote  to  colored  men  were  voted  down  and  the  resolution  as  orig 
inally  proposed  by  Wade,  was  adopted,  thus  defeating  the  sec- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  501 

ond  effort  for  colored  suffrage.  The  opponents  of  it  and  those, 
who,  like  Wade,  believed  in  it,  but  thought  it  inopportune,  to 
press  it  at  this  time,  united  to  defeat  it.  Sumner  was  for  it,  in 
season  or  out  of  season.  He  was  thoroughly  in  earnest  and  was 
now  the  recognized  leader  upon  this  question  in  the  Senate  and 
was  destined  to  so  continue,  until  its  final  triumph. 

I  have  dwelt  at  length  upon  these  early  movements  for 
universal  suffrage,  because  it  will  be  seen  that  they  were  soon  to 
play  an  important  part  in  the  question  of  reconstruction. 
Sumner  had  not  yet  insisted  on  it,  as  an  essential  condition  to 
be  imposed  upon  the  rebel  States,  before  they  could  resume  their 
place  as  States,  but  he  soon  did,  and  he  maintained  this  posi 
tion,  even  against  both  of  the  Presidents,  Lincoln  and  John 
son,  till  he  succeeded.  It  was  one  of  his  greatest  labors  and  like 
wise  one  of  his  greatest  triumphs.  Sumner  was  the  cham 
pion  of  the  rights  of  the  colored  race  in  the  Senate.  He  was 
opposed  to  all  discriminations  against  them  and  in  favor  of 
whatever  could  tend  to  uplift  them  and  improve  their  condi 
tion.  He  believed  that  they  should  be  given  the  power  to  help 
themselves  and  encouraged  and  instructed  in  the  use  of  it. 

As  illustrating  his  labor  to  this  end  there  may  be  mentioned 
the  creation  of  the  Freedman's  Bureau,  by  a  law  passed  at  the 
close  of  the  session  of  Congress,  in  March,  1865.  It  grew  out 
of  the  new  condition  of  the  colored  people  of  the  South,  who 
had  been  freed  by  the  President's  Proclamation  of  Emancipa 
tion.  They  were  relieved  from  all  obligation  to  labor  for  their 
former  masters  and  yet  were  without  the  means  of  sustaining 
an  existence.  Their  only  capital  was  their  labor.  Yet  in  many 
places  their  masters  had  abandoned  their  plantations  before  the 
inroads  of  the  Union  armies  and  these  colored  people  were  left 
to  starvation.  There  were  too  many  of  them  to  be  supported 
by  public  charity.  It  would  have  been  the  worst  of  policy  to 
have  them  so  supported,  if  they  could  be.  Some  of  them  had  al 
ready  got  the  impression,  that  the  Government,  in  the  fur 
therance  of  its  good  work,  was  to  furnish  each  colored  man 
"  forty  acres  of  land  and  a  mule,"  and  were  disposed  to  wait 
for  this  distribution.  The  need  was  to  furnish  them  work  and 
protect  them  in  it,  from  the  greed  of  employers,  until  they  could 
become  adjusted  to  their  new  condition  and  learn  to  take  care 
of  themselves ;  where  the  land  had  been  abandoned  set  them  to 
work  upon  it  and  aid  them  to  make  a  living  for  themselves.  It 
was  such  work  as  this  that  the  Freedman's  Bureau  sought  to 
do.  Sumner  called  it,  "  a  bridge  from  Slavery  to  Freedom." 

A  bill  to  establish  such  a  bureau  had  been  passed  by  the 
House  as  early  as  March  first,  1864.  The  next  day  it  came  to 


502  LIPE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  Senate  and  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  Slavery  and 
Freedmen  of  which  Sumner  was  chairman.  From  March  until 
the  last  of  May,  three  months.,  the  committee  was  occupied  in  an 
investigation  of  the  subject.  No  less  than  nine  different  proj 
ects  were  laid  before  the  committee,  some  by  eminent  citizens 
interested  in  the  freedmen,  such  as  Eobert  Dale  Owen  of  In 
diana,  John  Jay  of  New  York  and  E.  L.  Pierce  of  Massa 
chusetts.  Defects  were  pointed  out  in  the  House  bill.  The  re 
sult  of  the  whole  was  a  new  bill  drafted  by  Sumner  and  reported 
by  his  committee.  It  provided  for  the  care  of  such  persons  only 
as  had  once  been  slaves,  not  for  persons  of  African  descent  gen 
erally,  and  it  sought  to  secure  them  labor  in  such  places  as 
would  be  congenial  to  them,  but  prevented  any  system  of  en 
forced  labor  by  requiring  contracts  between  them  and  their  em 
ployers  to  be  attested  before  public  officials.  It  looked  to  secur 
ing  them  the  opportunity  to  labor,  under  contracts  well  guarded 
by  the  friendly  advice  of  agents  of  the  Government.  After  long 
and  acrimonious  debates,  and  many  attempts  to  defeat,  amend 
and  postpone,  after  conference  committees  of  the  House  and  the 
Senate,  to  trace  which  would  be  fruitless,  except  to  illustrate 
Sumner's  persistence  and  ability,  the  measure  was  finally 
passed,  and  approved  by  the  President,  on  the  third  of  March, 
1865.  It  created  a  department  that  was  destined  to  do  much 
good  and  likewise  encounter  much  criticism,  until  its  purpose 
was  served  and  it  was  abolished. 

Eeconstruction  came  up  again,  in  the  Senate,  on  June  tenth, 
1864,  when  Lane  of  Kansas  brought  in  a  joint  resolution  for 
the  recognition  of  the  free  State  Government  of  Arkansas. 
Sumner  opposed  the  resolution  in  a  speech  since  published, 
under  the  title:  "Make  Haste  Slowly/'  In  closing  he  coun 
selled  prudence,  urging  Senators,  that  while  they  made  haste, 
to  let  haste  be  governed  by  wisdom  and  caution  and  not  with 
the  sacrifice  of  all  safeguards  for  the  future.  At  the  same  time 
he  reminded  the  loyal  people  of  Arkansas  that  they  should  not 
be  discouraged,  but  remember  their  country  was  with  them,  al 
though  their  time  had  not  yet  come,  that  "  they  also  serve  who 
only  stand  and  wait."  In  this  speech  he  took  the  broad  ground 
that  the  readmission  of  Arkansas  at  this  time  would  be  un 
reasonable  and  dangerous.  The  people  that  were  asking  it  had 
until  recently  been  acquiescing  in  rebellion,  some  of  them  taking 
an  active  part  in  it  and  were  at  best  only  a  small  minority  of 
the  actual  voters  of  the  state.  To  grant  them  two  Senators  and 
the  representation  of  Arkansas  in  the  House,  and  Electoral 
'College  where  their  votes  might  determine  the  choice  of  a 
President,  would  be  subversive  of  the  rights  of  the  other  States 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  503 

and  of  the  principles  of  the  Constitution.  He  argued  that 
President  Lincoln's  proclamation  had  never  promised  them  such 
privileges,  but,  on  the  contrary,  had  been  careful  to  disclaim 
any  such  purpose,  expressly  saying,  that  each  House  of  Congress 
must  determine  whether  the  members  sent  from  any  State 
should  be  admitted,  that  the  President  only  issued  such  a  proc 
lamation  as  Commander  of  the  armies  and  that  the  State 
Government  that  issued  from  it  could  only  be,  like  its  source, 
military  in  character  and  consequently  only  provisional  or  tem 
porary,  until  it  received  the  sanction  of  Congress,  that  the  two 
Houses  of  Congress  must  act  together  and  with  the  President  in 
legislating  upon  the  subject  so  that  whatever  was  done  would  be 
harmonious.  It  would  not  do  to  have  Representatives  admitted 
to  the  House  and  Senators  denied  admission  to  the  Senate  so 
that  though  coming  from  the  same  State,  they  might  be  like 
the  famous  twins,  Castor  and  Pollux,  in  Grecian  mythology, 
one  of  whom  was  translated  to  Olympus  while  the  other  was 
left  upon  earth. 

Sumner  had  some  weeks  previously  offered  a  resolution  em 
bodying  his  plan  of  reconstruction.  It  was,  that  a  State  pre 
tending  to  secede  from  the  Union,  and  battling  against  the 
National  Government  to  maintain  this  pretension,  must  be 
regarded  as  a  Rebel  State,  subject  to  military  occupation,  and 
without  title  to  representation  in  the  Senate,  until  it  had  been 
readmitted  by  a  vote  of  both  Houses  of  Congress;  and  the 
Senate  should  decline  to  entertain  any  application  to  seat 
Senators  from  any  such  Rebel  State,  until  after  such  vote  of 
both  Houses  of  Congress.  This  was  offered,  in  the  Senate,  when 
it  had  under  consideration  the  credentials  of  claimants  as 
Senators  from  Arkansas.  When  Lane  moved  that  his  resolu 
tions  for  the  recognition  of  Arkansas  be  referred  to  the  Judi 
ciary  committee,  Sumner  moved  that  his  resolution  also  be 
referred  to  the  same  committee.  The  committee  reported 
adversely  upon  both  and  the  claimants  were  not  admitted  to 
seats  in  the  Senate. 

The  subject  of  reconstruction  came  up  in  the  Senate  again 
on  the  first  of  July,  only  three  days  after  this  adverse  report 
of  the  committee,  this  time  on  a  bill  introduced  in  the  House 
by  Henry  Winter  Davis.  By  the  bill  a  Military  Governor 
was  to  be  appointed  by  the  President  for  each  Rebel  State  and 
as  soon  as  resistance  to  the  United  States  ceased  in  the  State, 
this  Governor  was  to  make  an  enrolment  of  the  white  male 
citizens  of  the  State  and  submit  to  them  an  oath  to  support  the 
Constitution.  If  one-half  of  them  took  this  oath,  he  was  to 
order  an  election  to  a  constitutional  convention.  If  this  con- 


504  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

vention  declared  its  submission  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  and  also  adopted  a  constitution  for  its  State,  ex 
cluding  from  the  Legislature  or  office  of  Governor  and  from  the 
right  to  vote  for  either,  all  who  had  held  a  civil  office,  other  than 
ministerial,  or  military,  above  the  rank  of  Colonel,  under  the 
Confederate  Government;  and  forbidding  slavery  or  the  pay 
ment  of  any  debt  created  in  aid  of  the  Rebellion;  and  such 
constitution  was  adopted  by  a  majority  of  the  voters  already  en 
rolled  ;  and  this  fact  was  certified  to  the  President,  he  should, 
with  the  consent  of  Congress,  recognize  the  State  government  as 
competent  to  elect  Senators  and  Representatives. 

An  amendment  was  offered  to  this  bill  when  it  came  to  the 
Senate,  after  its  passage  by  the  House,  to  strike  out  the  word 
"  white/'  so  as  to  include  among  the  voters  all  male  citizens 
of  the  United  States.  This  amendment  received  only  five 
votes,  Sumner's  one  of  them,  and  had  twenty-four  against  it. 
Brown,  of  Missouri,  then  offered,  as  a  substitute  for  the  bill, 
another  simply  providing,  as  had  been  proposed  by  Stunner, 
that  a  Rebel  State  should  not  vote  for  Senators,  Representatives 
or  Electors,  until  the  suppression  of  the  insurrection  nor  until 
such  State's  return  to  obedience  be  declared  by  proclamation  of 
the  President,  issued  by  virtue  of  an  act  of  Congress. 

Sumner  offered  as  an  amendment  an  additional  section  that 
the  Proclamation  of  Emancipation  so  far  as  it  freed  the  slaves 
of  the  States  in  rebellion  be  enacted  as  a  statute  and  as  a  rule 
and  article  for  the  government  of  the  military  and  naval  forces. 
He  wished  emancipation  to  have  the  sanction  of  Congress  as 
well  as  of  the  President.  It  was  assumed  he  said  that  emanci 
pation  would  never  be  recalled,  but  who  could  tell  the  vicissi 
tudes  of  elections.  The  proclamation  was  a  military  measure 
of  the  President,  as  Commander-in-Chief  of  the  army  and  navy, 
proclaimed  as  "  a  fit  and  necessary  war  measure  for  suppressing 
the  Rebellion,"  adopted,  "  upon  military  necessity."  It  might 
be  argued  it  was  a  temporary  measure,  to  meet  an  emergency. 
Who  could  look  far  enough  into  the  future  to  see  what  other 
proclamation  might  thereafter  be  issued,  perhaps,  by  some 
other  President?  He  "would  make  the  present  sure  and  fix  it 
forever  and  immortal,"  not  leave  it  to  depend  upon  the  will  of 
any  one  man,  however  great.  The  amendment  to  the  Consti 
tution  had  not  yet  been  ratified.  He  would  place  it  in  the  Con 
stitution  if  he  could,  but  if  that  should  fail  he  would  at  least 
have  it  safeguarded  by  an  act  of  Congress.  His  amendment 
was,  however,  voted  down,  some  of  its  friends  feeling  that  it 
ought  not  to  b'e  attached  to  this  bill  for  fear  it  would  defeat 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  505 

it.  But  the  substitute  offered  by  Brown  of  Missouri,  was 
adopted  by  the  Senate. 

The  House  of  Representatives  refused  to  concur  in  Brown's 
substitute.  The  Senate  on  the  last  day  of  the  session,  passed  the 
bill  introduced  by  Henry  Winter  Davis  in  the  House  and  re 
ported  to  the  Senate  by  Wade  of  Ohio.  But  the  President  re 
fused  to  sign  it,  and  so  it  failed  to  become  a  law.  If  it  had 
become  a  law,  it  would  have  dashed  the  pledges  President 
Lincoln  had  held  out  to  the  Rebel  States,  in  his  proclamation, 
inducing  them  to  reorganize  the  States  and  send  Senators  and 
Representatives.  The  bill  required  one-half  of  the  voters  to 
unite  to  form  a  state  government ;  the  President's  proclamation 
was  satisfied  with  one-tenth.  His  was  familiarly  known  among 
Congressmen  as  "the  ten  per  cent,  plan."  The  bill  required 
one  method  of  ascertaining  these  voters,  by  registration  and  one 
form  of  oath  to  be  taken  by  them;  the  proclamation  required 
a  different  method  of  ascertaining  the  voters,  "  by  guess,"  the 
advocates  of  the  bill  said,  and  a  different  oath.  The  bill  for 
bade  Electors  for  President  to  be  chosen,  in  these  States,  while 
the  proclamation  permitted  it  and  the  advocates  of  the  bill 
said,  "  threatened  the  country  with  a  civil  war  to  exclude  them." 

The  President  published  a  statement  of  his  reasons  for  re 
fusing  to  sign  the  bill,  treating  it  as  a  plan  of  reconstruction  of 
fered  by  Congress  and  saying  that  having  already  proposed  one 
plan,  he  was  unwilling  to  inflexibly  commit  himself  to  another. 
He  was  also  unprepared  to  set  at  naught  what  had  been  done  in 
Louisiana  and  Arkansas  and  thus  discourage  their  loyal  citi 
zens  from  farther  effort.  Davis  of  the  House  and  Wade  of  the 
Senate,  the  chairmen  of  the  committees,  that  were  responsible 
for  the  bill,  prepared  and  published  a  protest  against  the  Presi 
dent's  action,  which  took  the  form  of  a  trenchant  reply  to  his 
statement.  The  only  effect  of  their  action  was  to  defeat  the 
renomination  of  Davis  to  Congress,  thus  permanently  retiring 
a  brave  and  brilliant  man  from  public  life,  for  before  the  next 
election  he  was  dead.  The  people  were  with  the  President,  be 
lieving  that  any  contest  betwen  him  and  Congress  over  this 
question  in  the  present  condition  of  the  country,  would  be  a 
mistake.  The  whole  subject  went  over  to  the  next  Congress. 

The  President,  however,  had  carried  his  point.  He  kept 
the  subject  of  reconstruction,  in  his  own  hands  and  out  of  the 
control  of  Congress.  During  the  recess  of  Congress,  he  in 
structed  the  military  officers  stationed  in  Arkansas  and  Lou^ 
isiana  to  sustain  the  governments  that  had  been  organized  under 
his  proclamation.  It  was  a  subject  in  which  the  President  felt 
much  interest.  The  prediction  had  been  made  in  Europe  and 


506  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

used  to  our  prejudice,  that  even  though  the  Rebellion  were 
suppressed,  the  feeling  in  the  South  was  so  great  that  the  two 
sections  could  never  be  reunited,  that  the  South,  if  kept  in  the 
Union,  could  only  be  governed  as  a  conquered  province.  The 
President  wished  to  prove  the  contrary  by  showing  that  even 
during  the  existence  of  the  war,  there  was  a  portion  of  the  pop 
ulation  of  the  South  devoted  to  the  Union.  This  portion  he 
wished  to  develop  into  a  positive  force  for  the  Union  and  in 
crease  in  numbers.  His  wish  may  have  carried  him  too  far. 
Contrary  to  his  habit,  he  assumed  authority  that  did  not  seem 
to  belong  to  his  office  and  established  a  precedent  which,  when 
followed  by  his  successor,  led  to  a  notable  contest,  in  which  it  is 
now  generally  conceded  President  Johnson  was  wrong.  It  is, 
however,  just  as  generally  believed,  that  such  a  contest  never 
would  have  occurred^  if  President  Lincoln  had  lived.  But 
however  politic  it  may  have  been  to  develop  and  demonstrate  a 
loyal  sentiment  in  the  South,  these  States  were  far  from  being 
prepared  to  resume  their  places  as  States  with  the  power  to  cast 
their  full  vote,  in  the  Electoral  College  to  choose  Presidents, 
and  in  Congress  to  pass  laws.  Too  much  of  them  was  still  in 
the  Rebellion  to  be  all  counted  as  if  in  the  Union. 

Sumner  while  differing  from  the  President  had  so  far  not 
antagonized  him.  In  his  speech,  "  Make  Haste  Slowly,"  he 
had  treated  the  plan  of  reconstruction  set  out  in  the  President's 
proclamation  as  a  suggestion  merely  and  as  not  intended  to  be 
binding  upon  either  him  or  Congress.  He  had  talked  the 
subject  over  privately  with  him,  more  than  once,  and  had  ad 
vised  moderate  action.  He  had  especially  urged  that  there  be 
no  contest  allowed  between  the  Executive  and  Congress  over 
the  question.  It  was  indeed  fortunate  that  the  bill  was  passed 
so  late,  for  with  the  feeling  there  was  among  Members,  over  his 
failure  to  approve  it,  a  contest  might  have  been  precipitated, 
if  Congress  had  still  been  in  session.  The  Members  having 
separated  and  being  among  the  people,  who  were  taking  the 
side  of  the  President,  opportunity  was  given  for  their  resent 
ment  to  cool,  before  they  reassembled.  Many  of  them  expected 
trouble  when  they  met  and  the  President's  Message  was  pre 
sented.  But  the  President,  with  the  wise  caution  that  was  so 
characteristic  of  him,  avoided  all  reference  to  it  in  his  Message. 

There  was  an  apparent  indisposition  to  open  the  subject  up 
in  Congress,  knowing  the  want  of  agreement  between  the  Presi 
dent  and  that  body.  But  kindred  subjects  kept  appearing. 
On  February  fourth,  Sumner  offered  a  series  of  resolutions  to 
declare  the  rule  for  ascertaining  the  three-fourths  of  the  States 
required  for  the  ratification  of  a  constitutional  amendment. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  507 

The  resolution  declared  that  the  participation  of  the  Rebel 
States  was  not  necessary,  that  as  in  proposing  by  Congress  of 
the  Thirteenth  Amendment  to  the  States  as  well  as  in  all  recent 
acts  of  Congress  and  all  recent  treaties,  the  vote  had  been  deter 
mined  simply  upon  the  basis  of  the  representation  at  the  time 
in  the  two  Houses,  so  must  the  three-fourths  required  for  ratifi 
cation  of  an  amendment  be  founded  on  the  simple  fact  of  rep 
resentation  in  the  Government  of  the  country  and  the  support 
of  it.  In  other  words  he  declared  that  the  Rebel  States 
were  not  to  be  counted  as  States  in  determining  whether 
the  necessary  three-fourths  of  the  States  had  ratified  the 
Amendment. 

Two  days  later  he  submitted  in  the  Senate  an  Amendment  to 
the  Constitution  apportioning  Representatives  in  Congress  ac 
cording  to  voters.  The  Constitution  provided  that  Representa 
tives  should  be  apportioned  among  the  several  States  according 
to  their  respective  numbers,  which  should  be  determined  by 
adding  to  the  whole  number  of  free  persons,  three-fifths  of  all 
other  persons.  The  "  three-fifths  "  thus  mentioned  had  been 
held  to  mean  slaves.  Thus  the  South  had  always  been  allowed 
Representatives  for  three-fifths  of  its  slaves.  Now  that  these 
slaves  had  be.en  freed  in  the  Rebel  States,  if  restored  to  State 
hood  these  States  would  be  allowed  representation  on  all  their 
free  colored  population  and  yet  none  of  it  be  allowed  to  vote. 
This  would  give  them  an  unjust  advantage  in  the  apportion 
ment.  Theretofore  the  South  had  only  been  allowed  representa 
tion  on  three-fifths  of  its  slaves.  Manifestly  the  colored  men 
should  be  allowed  to  vote  or  they  should  not  be  allowed  repre 
sentation.  Hence  Sumner  proposed  that  Representatives  should 
be  apportioned  according  to  voters. 

It  was  hoped  that  the  refusal  to  the  Rebel  States  of  any  voice 
in  the  ratification  of  constitutional  amendments,  and  especially 
of  that  one  just  pending  abolishing  slavery,  would  produce  a  de 
sire  for  reconstruction  and  hasten  the  end  of  rebellion.  It  was 
likewise  hoped  by  Sumner  that  the  correction  of  the  basis  of 
representation,  denying  the  right  to  count  the  colored  people,  if 
they  were  not  allowed  to  vote,  would  lead  to  the  grant  of  that 
right  to  them. 

Sumner  argued  that  it  was  a  great  thing  to  be  a  State  with 
the  privileges  of  representation  in  Congress  and  the  Senate  and 
in  the  Electoral  College.  Such  privileges  ought  not  to  be 
lightly  conferred,  and  they  should  be  guarded  carefully  against 
the  approaches  of  those  in  actual  rebellion  or  in  covert  hostility 
to  the  Union.  He  insisted  that  it  was  also  a  great  thing  to  be 
a  Senator  of  the  United  States  with  all  the  powers  and  privi- 


508  MFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

leges,  legislative,  diplomatic  and  executive,  appertaining  to  the 
office  and  the  question  whether  these  were  to  be  recognized 
who  were  returned  as  Senators  by  States,  whose  people  were 
yet  supporting  armed  opposition  to  the  Union,  was  a  matter  of 
grave  importance  to  the  whole  country.  Whether  a  State  in 
armed  rebellion  could  have  representation  upon  the  floor  of  the 
Senate  was  a  great  constitutional,  practical  and  political  ques 
tion.  Could  a  small  portion  of  a  State,  the  balance  of  which 
was  at  that  very  moment  confessedly  in  armed  rebellion,  be 
admitted  to  equal  privileges  with  the  great  States,  for  example 
of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  ?  Yet  such  were  the  questions 
that  were  constantly  recurring  when  the  subject  of  recon 
struction  was  approached.  A  curious  illustration  occurred  at 
this  session  when  the  credentials  of  Joseph  Segar  were  pre 
sented  to  the  Senate,  as  a  Senator  from  Virginia.  He  was  ap 
pointed  by  a  State  government  sitting  at  Alexandria.  It  was 
seriously  said  that  the  body  that  undertook  to  send  him  was 
little  more  than  the  Common  Council  of  Alexandria,  a  little 
city,  and  a  suburb  of  Washington.  Sumner  promptly  opposed 
his  admission  and  moved  the  reference  of  his  certificate  to  a 
committee.  He  was  astonished  to  find  a  strong  sentiment  with 
certain  Senators  against  his  motion,  which  revealed  itself  in -the 
discussion.  It  was  urged  that  Sumner  himself  had  entered, 
"  with  a  certificate  from  a  body  of  men,  in  Boston,  little  more 
in  number  and  character  than  the  Common  Council  of  that 
city."  If  that  be  true  answered  Sumner,  then  it  was  "  the  duty 
of  the  Senate  before  receiving  my  credentials  to  inquire  into 
their  origin.3'  The  debate  proceeded  till  Sherman,  of  Ohio, 
moved  that  the  credentials  of  Segar  be  laid  on  the  table.  It  was 
carried  by  an  emphatic  majority;  and  the  claim  to  a  seat  was 
never  prosecuted  farther. 

The  Senate's  struggle  over  reconstruction,  at  this  session, 
commenced  when,  Trumbull,  as  Chairman  of  the  Judiciary 
Committee,  reported  a  resolution  to  recognize  the  new  State 
government  of  Louisiana,  as  entitled  to  all  the  rights  of  a  State 
government,  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  This 
government  had  been  organized  in  accordance  with  the  procla 
mation  of  President  Lincoln.  He  had  advised  it  and  was  in 
frequent  consultation  with  those  under  whose  direction  it  had 
been  organized.  He  directed  the  military  officers  in  that  dis 
trict  under  whose  command  the  initial  steps  were  taken.  Some 
of  the  men  elected  were  his  confidential  friends  and  trusted 
correspondents  on  whom  he  relied  for  the  success  of  his  meas 
ures,  in  Louisiana.  The  President  was  much  interested  in  the 
recognition  of  the  new  government.  During  the  struggle  which 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  509 

followed,  it  was  freely  charged  that  Trumbull  who  reported 
the  resolution  for  its  recognition  and  now  moved  to  take  it  up 
for  consideration  had  been  "  miraculously  converted."  He  had 
opposed  the  recognition  of  Arkansas  and  the  reception  of  the 
credentials  of  its  Senators,  and  he  did  have  a  conference  with 
President  Lincoln  about  Louisiana  after  the  opening  of  the 
session  and  it  was  supposed  the  President  had  then  pressed  him 
to  move  for  this  recognition.  General  Banks,  commanding  that 
department,  came  on  to  Washington  and  remained  some  months 
after  the  session  opened  and  advocated  the  recognition.  Every 
thing  pointed  to  the  deep  interest  the  President  took  in  the  suc 
cess  of  the  measure.  This  made  Senators  loath  to  openly 
antagonize  it. 

Sumner's  mind  was  now  made  up  on  two  questions.  He  be 
lieved  first,  that  no  reconstruction  should  take  place  without 
congressional  action,  that  it  should  not  be  brought  about  by 
the  President  alone,  and,  second,  that  he  would  agree  to  none 
that  did  not  recognize  the  right  of  colored  men  to  vote.  He 
would  consent  to  no  discrimination  beween  the  two  races.  To 
the  unqualified  admission  of  Louisiana  as  proposed,  he  was 
unalterably  opposed.  He  was  so  much  opposed  to  it  that  he 
was  determined  to  defeat  it  by  whatever  constitutional  means 
lay  in  his  power,  if  it  became  necessary  to  use  them.  He  con 
sidered  it  so  dangerous  that  he  was  determined  that  the  regular 
appropriation  bills  of  the  session  should  go  unpassed,  if  it  be 
came  necessary  to  consume  the  balance  of  the  session  in  dilatory 
tactics  to  defeat  it. 

When  the  motion  was  made  to  proceed  to  consider  the  resolu 
tion,  Sumner  moved  as  a  substitute,  that  Senators  and  Repre 
sentatives  should  not  be  elected  to  Congress  from  a  State  in 
rebellion  until  the  President  proclaimed  all  armed  hostility  to 
the  Government  within  the  State  had  ceased  nor  until  its  people 
had  adopted  a  Constitution  not  repugnant  to  that  of  the  United 
States  and  its  laws,  nor  until  by  a  law  of  Congress  such  State 
shall  have  been  declared  entitled  to  such  representation.  This 
substitute  was  lost,  only  eight  voting  for  it,  while  twenty-nine 
were  against  it.  When  the  subject  came  up,  on  the  next  day, 
Sumner  sought  to  interpose  another  bill  for  consideration,  urg 
ing  that  it  had  been  more  considered  and  they  were  better  pre 
pared  to  vote  on  it.  He  was  pressing  the  change  strongly ;  and 
the  time  for  adjournment  was  drawing  near.  Conners  urged 
him  not  to  waste  the  fifteen  minutes  left,  in  discussion,  but  to 
let  them  take  a  vote.  "  Give  up/'  joined  in  several  Senators. 
"  Senators  say,  l  Give  up/  "  answered  Sumner.  "  That  is  not 
my  habit."  "  We  know  that/'  answered  Conners,  amid  the 


510  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

laughter  of  the  Senate.  And  the  resolution  went  over.  When  it 
came  up  next,  Chandler,  of  Michigan,  again  moved  to  postpone 
it.  A  debate  followed  with  a  good  deal  of  feeling.  Sumner 
was  charged  with  unfaithfulness  to  Freedom  and  the  Free 
States,  in  joining  hands  with  the  Democratic  Senator  from 
Kentucky  to  defeat  the  recognition  of  the  free  State  of  Louis 
iana.  Sumner  replied  that  their  measure  was  a  shadow,  cal 
culated  to  bring  disaster  and  he  warned  a  Republican  Senator 
to  hesitate  before  he  lent  his  influence  for  a  proposition,  "  open 
ing  the  way  to  an  ominous  future."  It  was  urged  that  the  vote 
of  Louisiana  was  needed  to  make  the  necessary  three-fourths  of 
the  States  to  ratify  the  constitutional  amendment  prohibiting 
slavery.  Sumner  denied  that  it  was  needed,  denied  that  the 
Rebel  States  should  be  considered  as  States,  in  a  count  for  the 
purpose  and  insisted  that  only  three-fourths  of  those  actually 
in  the  Union  were  necessary.  States  in  rebellion  had  no  right, 
he  argued,  at  such  a  time  to  control  the  Government  and  thwart 
the  overthrow  of  slavery.  The  motion  to  substitute  another  bill 
for  consideration  was  also  lost. 

The  debate  proceeded,  Henderson  of  Missouri,  said :  "  The 
Senator  from  Kentucky  thinks  the  Constitution  of  Louisiana 
is  the  offspring  of  military  usurpation,  but  he  does  not  say 
that  the  Constitution  itself  is  anti-republican."  "  I  do,"  an 
swered  Sumner.  "  You  do  ?  "  asked  Henderson.  "  Certainly," 
said  Sumner.  "  I  believe  now  candidly,"  said  Henderson, 
"that  the  Rebellion  is  about  at  an  end,  and  if  there  were  no 
other  evidence  of  it,  that  evidence  would  be  presented  to-night, 
in  the  close  alliance  and  affiliation  of  my  friend  from  Massa 
chusetts  and  my  friend  from  Kentucky.  Truly  the  lion  and 
the  lamb  hare  lain  down  together."  "  Who  is  the  lion  and  who 
is  the  lamb  ?  "  asked  Johnson,  of  Maryland.  "  That  is  for  the 
gentlemen  themselves  to  settle,"  answered  Henderson,  amid  the 
laughter  of  the  Senate.  "  The  Senator  from  Massachusetts," 
he  continued,  "  says  that  these  State  Constitutions  are  not  re 
publican  in  form.  Will  he  tell  me  in  what  respect  ?  "  "  If  the 
loyal  men,  white  and  black  recognize  it,  then  it  will  be  republi 
can  in  form.  Unless  that  is  done,  it  will  not  be,"  answered 
Sumner.  Henderson  asked,  Can  Congress  interfere  with  the 
right  of  suffrage  in  one  of  the  States?  Sumner  promptly  an 
swered,  "  Under  the  words  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  declaring  that  the  United  States  shall  guarantee  to 
every  State  a  republican  form  of  government,  it  is  the  bounden 
duty  of  the  United  States,  by  act  of  Congress,  to  guarantee  com 
plete  freedom  to  every  citizen,  immunity  from  all  oppression, 
and  absolute  equality  before  the  law."  Henderson  argued  that 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  511 

the  failure  of  Rebels  to  vote  did  not  violate  the  principles  of 
republicanism.  "It  was  the  failure  of  loyal  citizens  to  vote 
that  did  the  damage,"  answered  Sumner.  "I  answer  that," 
said  Henderson,  "  by  asking,  what  loyal  men  did  General  Banks 
prevent  from  voting  ?  "  "  All  the  colored  race,"  promptly  an 
swered  Sumner. 

The  debate  proceeding,  Sumner  proposed,  as  another  sub 
stitute,  a  series  of  resolutions,  that  the  Constitution  requires 
that  "the  United  States  shall  guarantee  to  every  State  in  the 
Union  a  republican  form  of  government "  and  that  the  term 
"  United  States  "  when  so  used  meant  "  the  President  and  both 
Houses  of  Congress  acting  for  the  whole  people  "  and  not  any 
military  commander  or  executive  officer;  that  in  the  definition 
of  the  expression  "  republican  form  of  government,"  we  should 
adopt  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and  insist  that,  in  every 
re-established  State,  all  persons  must  be  equal  before  the  law, 
that  there  should  be  no  discrimination,  in  favor  of  Rebels  who 
had  forfeited  all  rights,  and  exclusion  of  loyal  persons  who  had 
never  forfeited  any,  that  the  equality  of  all  should  be  secured  so 
that,  when  re-established,  the  governments  should  be  permanent 
and  not  again  be  liable  to  be  overthrown  by  an  oligarchical 
ruling  class,  that,  aside  from  questions  of  justice,  the  votes  of 
the  colored  people  were  needed  against  enemies  at  home  as 
much  as  their  guns  were  needed  against  rebels  in  the  field. 
These  resolutions  were  on  Sumner's  motion  ordered  to  be 
printed  and  he  gave  notice  that  at  the  proper  time  he  would 
offer  them  as  a  substitute. 

As  the  debate  proceeded  Reverdy  Johnson  argued  that  the 
United  States  had  no  right  to  impose  on  a  State  a  change  in  the 
qualification  of  its  electors,  that  this  must  be  done  by  the  State 
itself,  that  the  State  alone  had  the  right  to  determine  who 
should  vote.  Sumner  answered  that  the  Proclamation  of  Eman 
cipation  was  now  admitted  to  be  binding  and  would  be  sus 
tained  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  and  it 
recognized  the  right  of  the  United  States  to  impose  conditions 
on  the  Rebel  States  against  their  will.  At  the  close  of  John 
son's  speech,  Sumner  offered  a  proviso  to  the  resolution,  that 
reconstruction  was  not  to  take  effect  except  on  the  condition 
that  within  the  reconstructed  state  there  be  no  denial  of  the 
electoral  franchise  or  any  other  right  on  account  of  color  or 
race  but  that  all  persons  must  be  equal  before  the  law  and  that 
the  state  should  so  guarantee  before  it  could  return.  This  pro 
viso  was  opposed  by  Henderson,  Johnson  and  Pomeroy. 

Finally  Wade  moved  that  the  consideration  of  TrumbulFs 
resolution  be  postponed  to  the  next  Session.  Wilson  inter- 


512  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

rupted  the  consideration  of  it  by  a  motion  to  adjourn.  This 
was  lost.  Then  the  motion  to  postpone  was  lost.  Howard  then 
moved  to  adjourn.  This  too  was  lost.  Then  a  motion  to  lay 
the  resolution  on  the  table  was  lost.  Sumner  declared  the  pas 
sage  of  the  resolution  would  be  "  a  national  calamity,"  the  polit 
ical  Bull  Run  of  the  Administration,  sacrificing  a  great  cause 
and  the  destinies  of  the  Republic/'  and  urged  that  they  were  not 
ready  to  vote  on  it,  that  it  should  be  discussed  farther  and  he 
moved  to  adjourn  as  it  was  now  late  at  night.  But  the  motion 
was  lost.  Trumbull  appealed  for  a  vote,  saying  that  Sumner 
had  fought  it  now  day  after  day  to  prevent  a  vote  when  a  large 
majority  were  against  him,  and  had  overruled  him  time  and 
again  and  here  he  still  stood  at  half-past  ten  o'clock  Saturday 
night  making  dilatory  motions,  with  a  determination  to  brow 
beat  the  Senate.  Sumner  denied  that  he  was  brow-beating  the 
Senate.  "  I  heard  it  said  there  should  be  no  vote  to-night/'  re 
torted  Trumbull.  "  Is  that  brow-beating?"  asked  Sumner. 
"  The  question  between  the  Senator  from  Illinois  and  myself  is 
simply  this :  he  wishes  to  pass  the  measure,  and  I  do  not  wish 
to  pass  it.  He  thinks  the  measure  innocent;  I  think  it  dan 
gerous,  and,  thinking  it  dangerous,  I  am  justified  in  opposing 
it,  and  in  employing  all  the  means  in  our  arsenal/' 

Sumner  again  reiterated  his  prediction  that  the  resolution 
could  not  be  passed  that  night,  that  the  rules  would  prevent  it 
and  he  knew  it  and  its  importance  justified  its  defeat  in  that 
way,  this  being  true,  was  it  advisable  to  press  such  a  revolu 
tionary  measure  at  such  a  time?  If  he  did,  he  would  make  a 
mistake,  that  a  certain  character  of  antiquity  had  been  found 
sowing  salt  by  the  sea-side  and  plowing  it  in  and  Trumbull's 
occupation  was  just  about  as  profitable.  Sumner  again  moved 
to  adjourn,  but  it  was  again  voted  down.  And  the  debate 
continued.  Hendricks  of  Indiana  said  that  Sumner  was  de 
termined  that  none  of  these  States  should  be  heard  in  Congress 
until  those  who  spoke  for  them  spoke  the  voice  of  negroes  as 
well  as  of  white  men.  Others  said  this  should  not  be  and  the 
Democrats  were  a  unit  on  that.  Finally  Lane,  of  Kansas, 
moved  to  adjourn  and  shortly  before  midnight  the  Senate 
adjourned. 

The  next  Monday,  the  consideration  of  the  resolution  was 
taken  up  again.  Sherman  of  Ohio  interrupted  by  a  motion  to 
take  up  the  appropriation  bills  and  other  pressing  measures, 
reminding  Senators  that  it  was  now  February  twenty-seventh 
and  that  the  Session  must  close  March  fourth,  when  these  bills 
must  be  passed.  This  motion  was  debated.  Sumner  said  the 
Convention  that  formed  the  Louisiana  Constitution  was  "  a 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  513 

stupendous  hoax  "  and  that  the  resolution  to  recognize  it  was 
little  different  and  that  perhaps  the  expression  was  hardly 
strong  enough  to  characterize  a  work  where  military  power  and 
injustice  to  a  whole  race  had  been  enlisted  in  defiance  of 
self-evident  truths,  that  the  pretended  government  was  "  utterly 
indefensible/'  "  a  mere  seven  months  abortion,  begotten  by  the 
bayonet  in  criminal  conjunction  with  the  spirit  of  caste  and 
born  before  its  time,  rickety,  unformed,  unfinished, — whose 
continued  existence  would  be  a  burden,  a  reproach  and  a 
wrong/'  He  was  interrupted  by  Sherman  and  the  vote  was 
taken  on  his  motion  to  proceed  with  other  business.  It  was 
carried  by  a  vote  of  thirty-four  to  twelve  and  this  resolution  for 
the  admission  of  Louisiana  was  postponed — forever.  The  con 
sideration  of  it  was  never  resumed. 

An  extra  session  of  the  Senate,  of  a  week's  duration,  followed 
President  Lincoln's  second  inauguration,  during  which  there 
was  some  little  discussion  of  the  credentials  of  the  Senators 
from  Arkansas.  But  the  Senate  was  not  disposed  to  enter  upon 
the  subject  of  reconstruction  then.  Sumner  took  no  part  in  the 
discussion  farther  than  to  offer  a  resolution  in  which  he  named 
the  three  conditions  of  reconstruction  as,  cessation  of  hostilities, 
the  adoption  of  a  constitution,  republican  in  form,  and  an  act  of 
Congress  declaring  the  State  entitled  to  representation.  But 
he  did  not  press  it.  The  credentials  of  the  Arkansas  Senators 
were  referred  to  a  committee  and  were  not  reported  back. 

The  contest  had  been  a  hard  one  for  Sumner  and  he  was 
given  the  credit  of  defeating  the  resolution.  It  was  a  square 
defeat  of  reconstruction,  under  the  direction  of  the  President 
alone  and  without  the  action  of  Congress.  It  was  an  emphatic 
assertion  of  an  intention  to  extend  the  right  of  suffrage  to  the 
colored  people  of  the  South.  Had  the  resolution  succeeded  they 
would  probably  never  have  had  this  right.  Reconstruction 
having  been  inaugurated  without  it,  it  would  probably  have 
continued  so  to  the  end,  leaving  them  in  the  condition  in  which 
the  war  found  them  in  this  respect.  To  Sumner  therefore  is 
due  the  credit  of  turning  the  tide  in  their  favor  at  an  opportune 
moment.  Having  placed  his  hand  to  the  plow  he  never  turned 
back,  until  the  work  was  complete  and  the  colored  people  en 
joyed  the  right  to  vote. 

With  the  friends  of  the  resolution  there  was  some  bitterness 
towards  Sumner  for  defeating  it.  It  disturbed  the  relations 
between  him  and  Trumbull  for  some  years,  though  they  were 
finally  reconciled  and  their  former  friendship  was  renewed.  It 
was  supposed  it  would  destroy  the  good  relations  between  Sum 
ner  and  President  Lincoln.  One  newspaper  said  that  Sumner 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

"  had  kicked  the  pet  scheme  of  the  President  down  the  marble 
steps  of  the  Senate  Chamber  "  and  that  their  friendship  was  at 
an  end.  Another  said  that  the  President  was  indignant  at 
liis  course  and  had  reverted  to  the  subject  repeatedly  in  the 
presence  of  strangers.  It  was  freely  commented  on,  in  Wash 
ington,  in  this  way.  But  the  people  who  spoke  so  did  not  know- 
President  Lincoln.  As  Sumner  himself  put  it,  "  President 
Lincoln  was  too  good  a  man  to  be  influenced  by  an  honest 
opposition  on  political  grounds."  The  public  were  soon  to  be 
disabused  of  such  an  idea.  He  was  a  man  of  the  broadest  views 
and  of  the  most  catholic  toleration.  He  had  too  often  suffered 
unjustly  for  opinion's  sake  to  be  willing  to  punish  others  for  a 
conscientious  difference  with  him.  Petty  malice  found  no 
place  in  his  nature.  "  I  shall  do  nothing  in  malice/'  he  once 
wrote.  "  What  I  deal  with  is  too  vast  for  malicious  dealing." 

The  session  of  Congress  closed  on  the  fourth  day  of  March. 
On  that  day  President  Lincoln  was  inaugurated  for  the  second 
time.  It  was  Saturday.  The  newspapers  were  still  discussing 
the  rupture  between  Lincoln  and  Sumner  growing  out  of  the 
defeat  in  the  Senate  of  the  recognition  of  Reconstruction  in 
Lousiana.  On  the  fifth  of  March  Sumner  received  from  the 
President  an  autograph  note  asking  him  to  accompany  the 
Presidential  party  to  the  Inauguration  Ball  on  the  following 
evening,  inclosing  a  ticket  and  saying  their  carriage  would  call 
for  him  at  half-past  nine.  At  the  appointed  time  the  carriage 
called  and  as  the  Presidential  Party  entered  the  hall,  the  Presi 
dent  was  seen  on  the  arm  of  Mr.  Colfax,  Speaker  of  the  House, 
and  following  them  was  Mrs.  Lincoln  on  the  arm  of  Mr.  Sum 
ner.  Then  in  succession  came  other  members  of  the  party, 
Cabinet  Ministers  with  their  wives  and  some  of  their  families 
and  others.  The  circumstance  was  the  occasion  again  of  a  dis 
cussion,  by  the  newspapers,  of  the  relations  between  the  Presi 
dent  and  Sumner.  And  it  was  now  admitted,  that  their  friend 
ship  was  not  of  the  kind  to  be  disturbed  by  a  conscientious 
difference  on  public  questions,  however  important. 

Sumner  remained  in  Washington,  according  to  his  custom, 
for  some  weeks  after  the  close  of  the  session  to  get  up  his  cor 
respondence  and  to  study  questions  arising  in  the  Senate.  He 
was  much  interested  now  in  reconstruction  and  other  measures 
that  the  close  of  the  war  was  bringing  forward.  During  these 
days  he  called  often  at  the  White  House  to  see  the  President  up 
on  matters  of  business,  and  received  many  proofs  of  his  friend 
ship. 

One  important  matter  of  business  concerned  the  arrest  and 
prosecution  of  two  Boston  merchants,  Benjamin  and  Franklin 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  515 

Smith,  partners  as  Smith  Bros.  &  Co.  They  had  been  arrested 
by  order  of  the  Navy  Department  on  a  charge  of  fraud,  in  the 
performance  of  their  contracts  with  the  Department  and  con 
fined  in  Fort  Warren  at  Boston  Harbor.  Bail  to  the  amount  of 
half  a  million  dollars  was  required,  which  was  afterwards,  how 
ever,  reduced.  They  were  ordered  to  be  tried  at  Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania,  by  a  court  martial,  but  the  place  of  trial  also,  was 
afterwards  changed  to  Charlestown,  Massachusetts.  The  trial 
lasted  several  months.  It  ended  in  a  conviction  of  the  defend 
ants  and  a  sentence  to  imprisonment  for  two  years  and  to  pay  a 
fine  of  twenty  thousand  dollars.  This  judgment  and  sentence 
was  approved  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy;  and  it  only  re 
mained  to  be  approved  by  the  President.  But  the  friends  of  the 
defendants  asked  Sumner  to  intercede  with  the  President.  The 
President,  in  reply  to  Sumner's  inquiries,  placed  in  his  hands 
the  elaborate  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  on  the  case 
which  he  asked  Sumner  to  read  and  give  him  an  opinion  on  it. 
This  Sumner  did  in  writing. 

The  contract  of  the  Government  with  the  defendants  for  the 
sale  of  supplies  involved  a  million  or  twelve  hundred  thousand 
dollars  and  the  specification  which  was  claimed  to  be  proved  to 
sustain  this  charge  of  fraud  was  in  certain  tin  furnished  under 
the  contract  which,  it  was  claimed  was  not  of  the  kind  des 
ignated.  For  the  defendants,  it  was  insisted  that  the  whole 
trouble  grew  out  of  a  confusion  of  names,  the  tin  being  known 
to  the  trade  by  two  names.  It  was  conceded  on  both  sides  that 
the  fraud,  if  a  fraud,  only  amounted  to  about  two  hundred 
dollars.  The  President  disapproved  the  sentence  and  discharged 
the  defendants,  saying  that  to  his  mind,  it  was  beyond  the 
power  of  rational  belief  that,  on  a  contract  involving  so  much 
the  defendants  would  attempt  a  fraud  that  could  profit  them 
so  little. 

Nothing  can  better  illustrate  the  great  President's  way  of 
throwing  off  care  than  the  circumstances  attending  the  dis 
position  of  this  business.  When  Sumner  reached  him  with  his 
written  opinion,  it  was  late  in  the  evening  and  the  President  was 
just  entering  his  carriage  for  a  drive.  He  took  the  papers  from 
Sumner,  telling  him  to  return  the  next  day  and  consider  it  with 
him.  But,  urged  Sumner,  it  is  a  case  for  immediate  action.  If 
you  had  been  tried  and  subjected  to  large  expense  and  disgrace 
and  had  been  unjustly  convicted  and  imprisoned  and  yet  your 
innocence  was  proven,  you  would  not  wish  any  one  to  sleep 
until  you  were  set  free.  The  President  apparently  impressed 
with  this  suggestion,  told  Sumner  to  return  at  eleven  o'clock 
and  he  would  take  up  the  case  with  him.  Accordingly  at  eleven 


516  LIFE   OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

o'clock  that  night,  through  a  torrent  of  rain,  with  streets  flooded 
with  water  and  a  storm  of  wind  threatening  a  downfall  of  chim 
neys  upon  him,  Sumner  wended  his  way  to  the  White  House, 
where  he  found  the  President  ready  to  hear  him.  Sumner  read 
his  opinion  and  discussed  the  case  with  the  President.  It  was 
twenty  minutes  past  twelve  when  they  finished  going  over  it 
together.  The  President  then  said  he  would  prepare  his  deci 
sion  on  it  by  morning  and  to  come  over  and  hear  it,  "  when  I 
open  shop."  "  And  when  do  you  open  shop  ?  "  asked  Sumner. 
"At  nine  o'clock,"  was  the  answer.  Promptly  at  the  hour 
fixed,  Sumner  was  there  and  was  admitted.  The  President 
read  him  his  indorsement  on  the  papers  and  while  Sumner  was 
making  an  abstract  of  it,  the  President  broke  into  quotations 
from  Petroleum  V.  Nasby  and  added :  "  For  the  genius  to 
write  these  things  I  would  give  up  my  office  as  President." 
Seeing  that  Sumner  was  not  familiar  with  them,  he  went  to  a 
standing  desk  and  opening  it  took  out  a  pamphlet  collection 
of  the  letters  and  proceeded  to  read  from  them  to  Sumner  with 
evident  enjoyment,  apparently  losing  all  thought  of  the  case  in 
hand  and  of  his  Presidential  duties.  So  he  continued  for  per 
haps  twenty  minutes,  when  Sumner  thinking  there  must  be 
others  waiting  for  him  arose  to  go.  He  found  some  thirty  per 
sons,  among  them  Senators  and  Representatives,  waiting  for 
the  President,  in  the  anteroom,  as  he  passed  out.  Though  in 
the  company  of  the  President  much,  in  the  intervening  days 
before  his  death,  this  was  the  last  official  business  Sumner  trans 
acted  with  him. 

He  accompanied  the  President  and  Mrs.  Lincoln  to  the  thea 
tre  the  last  time  he  was  there  preceding  the  assassination  and 
on  her  invitation  he  accompanied  her,  with  some  other  friends, 
to  meet  the  President  at  City  Point,  where  the  President  was, 
on  his  return  from  Richmond,  during  the  closing  days  of  the 
war.  Leaving  the  President  there,  they  went  on  to  Richmond 
where,  accompanied  by  an  escort  of  cavalry,  they  visited  places 
of  interest,  among  them  the  capitol,  where  Sumner  got  the 
gavel  of  the  Confederate  Congress.  He  purposed  to  give  it  to 
Secretary  Stanton.  The  President  hearing  of  it,  said  jokingly 
to  Speaker  Colfax  that  he  ought  to  have  it.  "  Tell  Sumner  from 
me  to  hand  it  over/'  said  the  President  laughing.  The  party 
visited  the  tent  hospitals  at  City  Point,  where  Sumner  saw  the 
President  shake  hands  with  five  thousand  sick  and  wounded 
soldiers  and  when  done  the  President  told  him  his  arm  was 
not  tired.  They  returned  together  to  Washington  on  the 
Steamer  River  Queen.  The  party  was  a  small  one  and  they 
breakfasted,  lunched  and  dined  together,  'The  day  was  Hue, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER  517 

the  water  was  clear  and  beautiful;  it  was  Sunday  and  every 
thing  was  peaceful  and  quiet  as  the  little  steamer  wended  her 
way  homeward.  Everyone  was  happy.  The  long  years  of  the 
war  were  closing.  The  storm  was  over  and  the  bright  bow  of 
promise  was  in  the  sky.  All  were  looking  forward  joyfully  to 
the  future. 

Sumner  has  given  us  some  glimpses  of  his  own,  of  the  Presi 
dent  during  the  journey  homeward.  "  He  was  never  harsh,"  he 
said,  "  even  in  speaking  of  Jefferson  Davis ;  and  when  one  ( Mrs. 
Lincoln)  who  was  privileged  to  address  him  in  that  way  said, 
'  Do  not  allow  him  to  escape  the  law,  he  must  be  hanged,'  the 
President  replied  calmly,  in  the  words  so  beautifully  adopted  in 
his  last  Inaugural  Address, '  Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not  judged ; ' 
and  when  pressed  again,  by  the  remark  that  the  sight  of  Libby 
Prison,  which  they  had  both  recently  visited  in  Richmond, 
made  it  impossible  to  pardon  him,  the  President  repeated  twice 
over  the  same  words." 

And  again:  With  a  beautiful  quarto  Shakespeare  in  his 
hands,  he  read  aloud  the  well-remembered  words  of  his  favorite 
'Macbeth':— 

"  Duncan  is  in  his  grave; 
After  life's  fitful  fever,  he  sleeps  well, 
Treason  has  done  his  worst;  nor  steel,  nor  poison, 
Malice  domestic,  foreign  levy,  nothing, 
Can  touch  him  further." 

"  Impressed  by  their  beauty,  or  by  some  presentiment  unut- 
tered,  he  read  them  aloud  a  second  time.  As  the  friends  about 
listened  to  his  reading,  they  little  thought  how  in  a  few  days 
what  was  said  of  the  murdered  Duncan  would  be  said  of  him. 
'  Nothing  can  touch  him  further.'  He  was  saved  from  the  trials 
that  were  gathering.  He  had  fought  the  good  fight  of  Eman 
cipation.  He  had  borne  the  brunt  of  war.  Treason  had  done 
its  worst,  but  he  had  conquered.  He  had  made  the  name  of  Re 
public  a  triumph  and  a  joy  in  foreign  lands." 

Sumner  recalled  his  speech  at  Springfield :  " '  A  house  di 
vided  against  itself  cannot  stand.'  I  believe  this  Government 
cannot  endure  permanently  half  slave  and  half  free.  I  do  not 
expect  the  Union  to  be  dissolved,  I  do  not  expect  the  house  to 
fall,  but  I  do  expect  it  will  cease  to  be  divided.  It  will  become 
all  one  thing  or  all  the  other."  Sumner  asked  him  if,  at  any 
time,  he  had  any  doubt  about  his  prediction.  "  Not  in  the 
least,"  answered  the  President.  "  It  was  clearly  true  and  time 
lias  justified  me." 

They  reached  Washington  about  six  o'clock  in  the  evening  of 


518  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

April  ninth.  Sumner  did  not  see  the  President  again  until  he 
was  dying.  A  message  from  the  White  House  with  some 
flowers,  the  next  day  announced  the  surrender  of  Lee  and 
another  on  Tuesday  invited  Sumner  to  view  the  celebration  of 
the  victory  with  the  Presidential  party.  But  he  did  not  accept. 
Nor  was  he  at  the  White  House  two  days  later  on  the  occasion 
of  another  celebration,  when  General  Grant  was  there.  On  the 
fatal  night,  Friday  April  fourteenth,  Sumner  was  at  the  house 
of  Senator  Conness  of  California  engaged  in  conversation  with 
him  and  Senator  Stewart  of  Nevada,  when  some  one,  rushing 
in  from  the  street,  announced  that  the  President  had  been  shot 
and  that  an  attempt  had  also  been  made  to  assassinate  Secretary 
Seward.  Sumner  at  once  went  to  the  White  House  and  getting 
no  information  there  went  on  to  Ford's  Theatre  and  then  to  the 
house  opposite  where  the  President  had  been  carried.  The 
President  was  shot  at  twenty  minutes  past  ten  and  Sumner 
reached  him  about  thirty  minutes  later.  The  President  never 
recovered  consciousness,  giving  no  evidence  of  life,  but  deep, 
labored  breathing,  until  twenty-two  minutes  past  seven,  the 
next  morning,  when  the  breathing  ceased  and  the  work  of  the 
assassin  was  complete.  Sumner  remained  at  his  bedside,  until 
he  died,  a  deeply  affected  witness  of  this  sad  scene,  with  which 
the  war  was  closing.  When  the  end  came,  he  was  standing  at 
the  head  of  the  bed,  supporting  Robert  Lincoln  on  his  arm. 
He  had  borne  himself  well  through  the  trying  ordeal  but  on 
two  occasions  gave  way  to  overpowering  grief  and  sobbed  aloud, 
turning  his  head  and  leaning  on  Sumner's  shoulder.  After 
all  was  over,  Sumner  quietly  left  the  house. 

As  he  passed  out  into  the  gray  dawn  of  the  drizzling  morning 
he  met  General  Halleck,  whose  carriage  had  been  in  waiting, 
just  getting  into  it.  Sumner  got  in  beside  him  to  go  to  Mr. 
Seward's.  On  the  way  they  stopped  at  President  Johnson's, 
where  General  Halleck  told  him  of  President  Lincoln's  death 
and  warned  him  not  to  go  upon  the  street  without  a  guard. 
At  Mr.  Seward's,  Sumner  inquired  for  the  Secretary  and  his 
son,  who  were  both  victims  of  the  same  plot.  Mrs.  Seward 
answered  his  card.  Her  friendship  had  been  so  constant  for 
Sumner  during  his  early  years  in  the  Senate,  that  it  affected 
him  deeply  to  see  her  sick  yet  subjected  to  the  additional  trial 
of  the  probable  loss  of  her  husband  and  son.  It  was  the  last 
time  he  saw  her.  The  blow  probably  hastened  her  end.  The 
husband  and  son  recovered  but  for  her — the  shock  was  too 
great ! 

By  eight  o'clock  Sumner  was  at  his  own  apartments,  where 
he  found  guards  stationed  by  order  of  the  Secretary  of  War, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  519 

who  feared  that  Sumner,  by  reason  of  his  prominence  against 
Slavery  and  for  the  prosecution  of  the  war,  might  be  among 
those  marked  for  destruction.  Here,  weary  and  sad,  he  seated 
himself,  at  last,  to  reflect  on  the  scenes  of  the  night.  His  first 
thought  filled  him  with  new  loathing  for  the  barbarism  of 
slavery.  The  meal  prepared  stood  untasted  before  him,  as  he 
sat,  bowed  down  with  sadness,  over  the  irreparable  loss,  but 
grim  and  determined  as  ever.  The  nature  of  the  great  and 
good  President  was  so  essentially  humane  and  he  had  seen  it 
lately  proved  so  tender  towards  the  conquered  enemy  that  it 
was  hard  to  believe  that  madness  could  be  carried  so  far  as  to 
compass  his  death.  Yet  he  was  reminded  that  his  death  would 
do  more  for  the  cause  than  any  human  life.  And  what  was 
any  single  life  compared  with  the  cause ! 

During  the  coming  days,  Sumner  was  several  times  at  the 
White  House  to  express  his  sympathy  for  the  stricken  family 
of  the  President  and  to  aid  them  in  such  kind  offices  as  he 
could.  The  widow  broken-hearted  seemed  to  turn  to  the  cher 
ished  friend  of  her  husband  and  herself,  so  loyal,  as  they  all 
knew,  in  the  dark  days  as  well  as  in  the  happier  ones.  When 
she  left  Washington  she  gave  Sumner  two  tokens  of  her  hus 
band,  the  one  a  picture  of  John  Bright,  the  friend  of  Sumner 
whom  he  had  brought  so  near  to  her  husband.  He  was  the 
friend  of  their  country  too.  It  was  a  small  picture  that  he  had 
prized.  The  other,  his  cane,  which  she  was  sure  he  would 
treasure  as  connected  with  his  memory.  She  accompanied  the 
latter  with  a  short  note  remindirig  him  of  his  kindness  to  them 
and  their  regard  for  him. 

President  Lincoln  died  on  Saturday  April  15.  On  the  fol 
lowing  Monday  at  noon,  a  meeting  was  held,  in  the  Senate 
Chamber,  of  the  Senators  and  Eepresentatives  remaining  in 
Washington,  for  it  will  be  remembered  neither  House  was  in 
session.  The  purpose  of  the  meeting  was  to  take  appropriate 
action  upon  the  death  of  the  President  and  make  arrangements 
for  the  funeral.  The  President  pro  tern  of  the  Senate  was 
Chairman  and  the  Speaker  of  the  House  was  Secretary.  The 
object  of  the  meeting  was  stated  by  Senator  Foote  of  Vermont 
and,  on  motion  of  Sumner,  a  committee  was  appointed,  of 
which  he  was  made  chairman,  to  report  at  four  p.  M.,  on  the 
proper  action  of  the  meeting.  The  committee  reported  a  list 
of  pall  bearers  and  a  Congressional  Committee  of  one  for  each 
State  to  accompany  the  remains  to  Illinois,  and  also  reported 
resolutions,  drawn  by  Sumner,  expressing  their  veneration  and 
affection  for  the  dead  President,  with  an  estimate  of  his  char 
acter  and  asking  the  President  by  proclamation  to  recommend 


520  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

a  day  for  the  people  of  the  nation  to  assemble  and  commemorate 
his  life.  President  Johnson  accordingly  appointed  June  first 
as  the  day.  Sumner  was  invited  by  the  Municipal  Authorities 
of  Boston  to  deliver  the  oration,  in  that  city,  on  this  com 
memorative  occasion  and  he  accepted  the  invitation. 

The  oration  opened  with  the  solemn  words :  "  In  the  universe 
of  God  there  are  no  accidents.  From  the  fall  of  a  sparrow  to 
the  fall  of  an  empire  or  the  sweep  of  a  planet,  all  is  according 
to  Divine  Providence,  whose  laws  are  everlasting.  No  acci 
dent  gave  to  his  country  the  patriot  we  now  honor.  No  acci 
dent  snatched  this  patriot,  so  suddenly  and  so  cruelly,  from  his 
sublime  duties.  Death  is  as  little  an  accident  as  life.  Never, 
perhaps,  in  history  has  this  Providence  been  more  conspicuous 
than  in  that  recent  procession  of  events,  where  the  final  triumph 
is  wrapped  in  the  gloom  of  tragedy.  It  is  our  present  duty  to 
find  the  moral  of  the  stupendous  drama/' 

It  was  the  second  time  in  the  history  of  the  country  that  the 
President  had  appointed  a  day  for  such  observance.  The  first 
was  on  the  occasion  of  the  death  of  Washington.  This  fact 
suggested  a  comparison  between  the  two  Presidents,  Washing 
ton  and  Lincoln,  which  Sumner  dwelt  upon  for  some  minutes. 
The  one  was  of  high  birth  and  lofty  lineage  surrounded  from 
childhood  to  the  day  of  his  death  by  all  the  accompaniments 
which  wealth  and  position  could  furnish;  the  other,  he  said, 
was  the  child  of  poverty  and  privation  inured  from  birth  to 
manhood  to  the  hard  circumstances  of  frontier  life,  born  in  a 
log  cabin,  his  grandfather  had  been  killed  by  Indians  and  his 
father  had  followed  the  frontier  westward,  first  from  Ken 
tucky  to  Indiana  and  later  to  Illinois,  the  son  helping  to  split 
the  rails  and  daub  the  cabins  for  the  new  homes.  In  this  hard 
life  he  was  reared  till  "  at  the  age  of  twenty-one  he  left  his 
father's  house  to  begin  the  world.  A  small  bundle,  a  laughing 
face,  and  an  honest  heart, — these  were  his  simple  possessions, 
together  with  that  unconscious  character  and  intelligence  which 
his  country  learned  to  prize."  Yet  both  Washington  and  Lin 
coln  fought  the  battles  of  the  nation  in  its  two  greatest  wars ; 
the  one,  for  national  independence  and  the  other,  for  national 
unity,  on  the  basis  of  liberty  and  equality. 

Sumner  then  traced  Lincoln's  career  as  he  appeared  in  suc 
cession,  flat-boatman,  captain  in  the  Black  Hawk  war,  surveyor, 
member  of  the  Legislature,  attorney  and  Congressman,  always 
upward  with  no  step  backward  till  he  reached  the  high  places 
of  earth.  He  dwelt  at  length  upon  the  debate  with  Douglas 
and  his  later  speeches  against  slavery,  especially  upon  his  ut 
terances  on  the  great  truth  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLE8  SUMNER  521 

that  all  men  are  created  equal.  Sumner  was  fresh  from  his 
struggles  in  Congress  for  the  equal  rights  of  the  blacks  and 
their  recognition,  in  the  suffrage  of  the  States  lately  in  rebellion, 
and  he  pointed  with  emphasis  the  lesson  on  this  question  as 
drawn  from  the  speeches  of  Lincoln.  The  eulogy  has  been 
criticised  for  dwelling  unduly  upon  this  subject.  It  is  urged 
that  Lincoln  did  not  have  this  question  in  his  mind  at  the  time 
he  made  the  speeches.  It  is  sufficient  answer  to  say  that  the 
premises  from  which  Lincoln  reasoned  could  admit  of  no  other 
conclusion  and  though  he  was  at  the  time  arguing  against 
slavery  he  recognized  the  logical  conclusion,  at  the  time  of  his 
death,  as  applied  to  suffrage.  He  had  not  reached  the  conclu 
sion  of  Sumner  that  it  was  to  be  secured  by  act  of  Congress  as 
a  condition  of  reconstruction  but  probably  inclined  to  the  be 
lief  that  the  States  themselves  by  local  legislation  were  the 
proper  parties  to  deal  with  the  question.  He  had  himself  sug 
gested  colored  suffrage,  extended  to  certain  classes,  "the  very 
intelligent  and  especially  those  who  had  fought  gallantly  in 
our  ranks."  But  Sumner  recognized  in  this,  as  in  other  ques 
tions  a  certain  slowness  of  Lincoln  in  reaching  conclusions  as 
one  of  his  limitations,  compensated,  however,  by  his  tenacity  in 
adhering  to  his  convictions  when  once  formed. 

He  dwelt  upon  Lincoln's  entrance  to  the  White  House  full  of 
anxious  solicitude  and  with  a  devout  trust  in  Providence  as  he 
approached  a  duty  greater  than  had  devolved  on  any  other  since 
Washington,  State  after  State  abandoning  its  place,  Senator 
after  Senator  dropping  from  his  seat,  fort  after  fort  seized  with 
their  munitions  of  war  "  while  the  actual  President,  besotted 
by  slavery,  tranquilly  witnessed  the  gigantic  treason,  as  he  sat 
at  ease  in  the  Executive  Mansion,  and  did  nothing." 

So  he  followed  Lincoln  as  henceforward  his  history  became 
the  history  of  his  country,  through  the  steps  of  the  war,  paus 
ing  to  dwell  particularly  upon  his  proclamation  giving  freedom 
to  the  slaves  and  his  careful  avoidance  of  a  European  war, 
meeting  each  situation  with  masterful  ability  to  the  last.  The 
address  increased  in  interest  as  he  came  to  the  last  days  wlien 
together  they  had  viewed  the  closing  scenes  of  the  war  and  felt 
that  peace  was  assured,  that  the  struggle  was  over  and  what  re 
mained  was  as  gathering  up  the  hard-earned  sheaves  of  the 
harvest.  He  dwelt  upon  his  character,  his  loyalty  to  principle, 
regardless  of  consequences  to  himself,  his  caution  in  reaching 
conclusions,  his  firmness  in  maintaining  them,  his  power  of 
speech  and  thrown  around  all,  and  enlivening  and  pointing  all, 
his  humor  and  his  unfailing  common  sense.  He  recalled  how 
modest  and  approachable  he  was,  always  accessible  to  the  widow 


522  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  orphan,,  the  sick  and  the  wounded,  or  the  prayer  of  the 
lowly.  His  place  in  history  he  likened  to  that  of  William  of 
Orange,,  or  of  Henry  the  Fourth  and  Saint  Louis  of  France. 

The  address  upon  the  whole  must  be  classed  as  one  of  Sum- 
ner's  best  eulogies.  The  style  is  elevated  throughout,  the 
diction  and  finish  is  noticeably  fine,  even  among  his  works  where 
it  is  generally  noticeable;  and  there  runs  through  it  a  so 
lemnity  and  a  trust  in  Providence,,  as  the  ruler  of  men  as  well 
as  of  nations,  that  gives  it  a  marked  effect.  It  bears  every 
where  evidence  of  care  in  its  preparation.  At  the  time  of  its 
delivery  there  was  a  disappointment  felt.  Contrary  to  his  cus 
tom  theretofore,  in  his  addresses  at  Boston,  it  was  read  and 
closely  too,  so  that  its  effect,  at  the  time,  was  not  as  marked  as 
it  would  have  been,  if  delivered  without  the  use  of  a  manuscript. 
Even  his  reading  was  not  easy.  He  omitted  his  former  care 
for  oratorical  effect  and  seemed  content  to  reach  his  impres 
sion  upon  the  wider  audience,  by  means  of  the  newspapers.  He 
preferred  to  devote  the  time  at  his  command,  for  its  prepara 
tion,  to  making  it  worthy  of  a  permanent  place  in  literature. 
And  it  is  from  this  standpoint  that  it  should  be  viewed.  By 
those  most  competent  to  judge,  it  has  been  placed  in  the  front 
rank  of  the  eulogies  upon  Lincoln  and  it  deserves  to  be  classed 
with  the  best  of  our  mortuary  literature. 

After  this  narrative  of  the  relations  of  Sumner  and  Lincoln 
it  is  hardly  necessary  to  notice  a  statement  of  Nicolay  and 
Hay  in  their  biography  of  Lincoln  that  there  was  a  movement 
against  Lincoln  to  force  him  to  withdraw  from  the  Republican 
ticket  in  1864  when  a  candidate  the  second  time  and  that  this 
movement  "  had  the  earnest  support  and  eager  instigation  of 
Henry  Winter  Davis  of  Maryland,  of  the  editors  of  the  Cin- 
cinnatti  Gazette  of  Ohio,  and  what  would  have  surprised  Mr. 
Lincoln  if  he  had  known  it,  of  Charles  Sumner  of  Massachu 
setts."  Sumner  did  share  with  many  good  men,  during  the 
earlier  years  of  the  war,  doubts  of  Lincoln's  fitness  for  the  place, 
owing  to  a  certain  slowness  and  apparent  want  of  decision. 
The  want  of  success  of  our  arms  at  that  time  perhaps  contrib 
uted  to  this  feeling.  But  he  declined  to  sign  any  paper  or  take 
any  part  in  any  action  against  him,  believing  that,  if  any 
movement  towards  a  different  candidate  was  had,  it  should  be 
through  the  voluntary  withdrawal  of  Lincoln  himself.  He  in 
sisted  that  if  Lincoln  did  not  do  so,  that  then  all  should  rally 
around  him  and  elect  him.  Any  other  course  he  believed  would 
disunite  the  party  and  threaten  defeat.  The  adoption  of 
the  Chicago  Platform  by  the  Democrats,  declaring  the  war  a 
failure,  following  the  victories  of  Gettysburg,  Vicksburg  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  523 

Atlanta,  Sumner  thought,  acting  like  an  overdose  of  ar 
senic,  would  cure  itself.  Through  it  all,  he  was  loyal  to 
Lincoln.  He  would  do  nothing  against  him.  He  would  act 
only  with  him.  He  spoke  at  a  meeting  called  in  Faneuil  Hall 
to  ratify  the  nomination,  at  Cooper  Institute,  in  New  York 
City,  at  various  places  in  Massachusetts  and  in  Connecticut, 
during  the  campaign,  and  also  at  a  meeting  called  in  Faneuil 
Hall  for  congratulation  on  the  evening  of  the  election,  on  each 
occasion  with  his  old-time  earnestness  and  success. 

Therefore  I  adopt  the  statement  of  another  biographer  of 
Lincoln,  Isaac  N.  Arnold,  a  Member  of  Congress  from  Lin 
coln's  own  State  during  the  war  and  his  warm  personal  friend, 
as  expressing  the  true  relation  of  Lincoln  and  Sumner.  "  Mr. 
Sumner,"  he  says,  "  had  become  the  sincere  and  confidential 
adviser  of  Lincoln.  These  two  men,  in  many  respects  so  unlike, 
became  the  most  ardent  and  affectionate  personal  friends.  They 
rode  and  walked  together  and  seemed  to  enjoy  each  other's  so 
ciety  like  brothers,  Sumner  the  scholar  and  man  of  convention 
ality,  the  favorite  American  of  the  English  aristocracy,  found 
in  Lincoln  one  that  he  admired  and  confided  in  above  all 
others/' 


CHAPTER  XXXII 

RECONSTRUCTION"  UNDER  JOHNSON — HIS  CHARACTER — SUM- 
NER'S  WORK  FOR  EQUAL  RIGHTS — THE  FOURTEENTH  AMEND 
MENT SUMNER  AND  THE  PRESIDENT — EULOGIES  ON  COL 
LEAGUES 

THREE  hours  after  the  death  of  President  Lincoln,  his  suc 
cessor  was  inaugurated,  at  his  apartments  in  the  Kirkwood 
Hotel,  in  the  presence  of  the  members  of  the  Cabinet,  who  were 
able  to  attend,  and  of  the  Senators,  who  remained  in  Washing 
ton.  It  was  fortunate  that  Vice-President  Johnson  was  in  the 
city,  at  the  time  of  the  assassination.  He  had  come  to  Wash 
ington  only  five  days  before  and  it  was  his  intention  to  leave 
within  a  few  hours  after  the  assassination  occurred.  His  ab 
sence  would  have  furnished  a  better  opportunity  for  a  political 
disturbance.  As  it  was,  the  power  passed  quietly  and  peace 
fully  from  the  hand  of  one  ruler  to  that  of  another  and  so 
quickly  that  almost  with  the  news  of  the  assassination,  the  word 
of  the  inauguration  of  the  new  President  reached  the  people. 
Little  did  they  then  realize  the  change  that  was  thus  wrought, 
in  the  policy  of  the  administration  !  For  there  has  never  been  a 
more  radical  change  made,  in  our  national  policy,  than  was 
made  when  the  power  passed  from  the  hand  of  Abraham  Lin 
coln  to  that  of  Andrew  Johnson. 

It  was  remarked,  at  the  time  the  oath  was  administered,  by 
Chief  Justice  Chase,  to  President  Johnson,  he  made  no  ex 
pression  of  an  intention  to  follow  the  policy  of  his  predecessor. 
Though  such  a  statement  was  made,  in  a  speech  to  a  sorrowing 
delegation  from  President  Lincoln's  own  State,  a  short  ,time 
later,  on  a  revision  of  the  speech,  by  President  Johnson  it  was 
omitted,  thus  showing  that,  while  the  subject  was  thought  of, 
he  was  not  prepared  to  commit  himself  to  it.  To  men  of  a 
later  day,  this  hesitation  seems  unaccountable.  President  Lin 
coln  had  reached  such  an  assured  place,  in  the  hearts  of  the 
people,  that  almost  any  policy  suggested  by  him  would  have 
been  received,  by  a  great  proportion  of  the  country,  without 
question.  His  conduct  of  the  war  had  been  eminently  success 
ful  and  satisfactory  to  the  North  and  his  administration  had 
been  recently  indorsed  by  a  renomination  and  a  triumphant 
re-election.  President  Johnson's  failure  to  express  himself  in 

524 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  525 

favor  of  a  continuance  of  the  same  policy,  can  only  be  ex 
plained,  by  a  conviction,  that  it  was  hardly  in  harmony  with 
his  own  opinions  or  those  of  his  confidential  advisers,  at  the 
time,  or  else  that  he  was  not  prepared  to  commit  himself  to  any 
policy. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  he  assumed  the  Presidency  at  a 
difficult  time.  The  war  was  closed.  The  settled  policy  of  a  vig 
orous  prosecution  of  it,  which  had  been  pursued,  was  now  at  an 
end.  The  questions  of  reconstruction  and  the  care  of  the  freed- 
men  were  comparatively  untried.  Such  questions  had  never 
before  appeared,  except  during  President  Lincoln's  adminis 
tration,  and  then  only  discussed ;  they  were  not  settled.  Con 
sequently  there  was  no  precedent  by  which  he  could  be  guided. 
The  respect  and  affection  that  had  come  to  President  Lincoln 
during  the  four  years  of  his  life  of  trial,  in  the  White  House, 
could  not  of  course  be  transferred  to  another.  Instead  came  the 
cold,  critical  regard  that  usually  meets  a  new  and  untried  man. 
It,  perhaps,  came  to  Johnson  in  added  measure. 

His  career  thus  far  had  been  mainly  an  honorable  one.  He 
was  born  in  North  Carolina  and  belonged  to  the  class,  known 
in  the  South  as  "  poor  whites."  He  was  brought  up  to  the  trade 
of  a  tailor.  In  early  life  he  removed  to  eastern  Tennessee.  He 
learned  to  read  in  his  fifteenth  year.  He  was  successively 
Mayor  of  his  town,  Member  of  the  Legislature,  five  terms  a 
Member  of  Congress,  two  terms  Governor  of  his  State,  and  a 
United  States  Senator — and  all  these  before  he  was  fifty  years 
of  age.  He  entered  the  Senate  in  1857.  Sumner  was  still  suf 
fering  from  the  Brooks  assault  and  consequently  was  much  of 
the  time,  absent  from  his  seat.  He  continued  in  the  Senate, 
until  March  1862,  when  he  left  at  the  earnest  solicitation  of 
President  Lincoln  to  accept  the  difficult  post  of  Military  Gov 
ernor  of  Tennessee.  When  that  State  had  adopted  the  ordi 
nance  of  Secession  he  refused  to  be  bound  by  it  or  to  enter  the 
Rebellion.  While  every  other  Senator  followed  the  fortunes 
of  his  state,  he  alone  of  the  twenty-two  from  the  eleven  Con 
federate  States,  remained  firm.  He  filled  the  office  of  Military 
Governor  under  circumstances  of  peculiar  difficulty,  and  often 
peril,  with  such  ability  as  to  attract  the  attention  of  the  North 
and  lead  to  his  nomination  to  the  Vice-Presidency.  He  had 
gained  the  implicit  confidence  of  President  Lincoln,  who,  at  his 
suggestion,  omitted  the  State  of  Tennessee,  from  the  operation 
of  the  Proclamation  of  Emancipation.  After  he  had  filled  the 
office  of  President,  with  all  the  warring  incidents  of  the  Im 
peachment  proceedings,  and  had  retired  to  private  life,  he  was 
returned,  by  his  State,  to  the  United  States  Senate  and  died  in 


526  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

that  office.  This  career,  of  almost  uninterrupted  success^  shows 
him  at  least  to  have  had  some  strong  points. 

But  it  brings  out  one  trait  of  character,  in  strong  relief.  No 
man  would  have  been  the  only  one  of  twenty-two  Senators,  to 
stand  out,  in  an  independent  career  of  his  own,  under  such  cir 
cumstances,  as  surrounded  him  from  1857  to  1862,  and  at  the 
expiration  of  that  time  to  have  assumed  and  maintained  the 
perilous  post  of  Military  Governor  of  a  State,  over  which  the 
hot  surges  of  such  a  Rebellion  were  rolling  back  and  forth, 
without  having  some  tenacity  of  his  own  opinions,  when  once 
soberly  formed.  Whatever  other  faults  he  may  have  had,  no 
one  has  accused  him  of  vacillation.  But  it  has  been  curiously 
enough  observed  that  in  the  brief  inaugural  that  he  pronounced, 
when  assuming  the  office  of  President,  occupying  in  its  delivery 
hardly  five  minutes,  "  I "  and  "  my  "  and  "  me"  occurred  at 
least  twenty  times. 

One  of  the  peculiarities  of  his  career  is,  that  though  born  and 
continuing  to  live  in  a  slave  State,  he  was  never  in  sympathy 
with  slavery.  He  realized  that  slaves  were  held  by  a  very  few 
owners,  powerful  and  tvrannical  in  disposition,  but,  if  resisted, 
without  the  power  to  sustain  their  pretensions.  His  own  sec 
tion  of  Tennessee  was  in  the  rough  and  mountainous,  but  fertile 
eastern  portion  of  the  State,  devoted  to  small  farming,  but  ill 
fitted  to  slave  labor.  Johnson's  quick  eye  caught  the  situation 
and  his  influence  was  generally  thrown  to  measures  to  benefit 
the  plain  people,  the  small  farmers  or  the  poorer  classes,  rather 
than  with  the  owners  of  the  great  plantations.  He  powerfully 
advocated,  and  is  credited  with  being  the  author,  of  the  home 
stead  policy  of  the  Government ; — one  hundred  and  sixty  acres 
of  land  to  the  actual  settler — in  the  distribution  of  the  unim 
proved  land  of  the  West,  a  policy  necessarily  fatal  to  slavery, 
which  could  only  thrive  on  large  plantations.  Though  a  South 
ern  Senator,  he  denounced  Secession,  with  vigorous  boldness. 
While  a  Member  of  the  House,  in  1847,  he  arose,  as  John 
Quincy  Adams,  then  near  the  close  of  life,  entered;  and  pub 
licly  tendered  him  the  choice  of  his  seat,  that  venerable  com 
moner  having  been  detained,  by  sickness,  from  appearing,  at 
the  opening  of  the  session,  to  make  a  choice  of  one  for  him 
self. 

While  in  the  Senate,  his  membership  being  comparatively 
new,  he  was  not  much  given  to  speech  making  and  his  part  in 
the  work  was  not  a  conspicuous  one.  When  he  came  to  the  Pres 
idency,  Sumner's  acquaintance  with  him  was  only  slight.  At 
the  death  of  President  Lincoln,  he  was  stopping  at  the  Kirk- 
wood  Hotel,  in  Washington,  but  lie  then  removed  his  lodging 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  527 

to  rooms,  in  the  house  of  Samuel  Hooper,  a  Member  of  Congress 
from  Boston,  and  opened  a  temporary  office,  for  business,  in  the 
Treasury  Building.  He  continued  to  occupy  these  quarters 
during  the  time  President  Lincoln's  family  remained  in  the 
White  House.  Appreciating  the  importance  of  his  influence 
upon  the  questions  of  reconstruction,  Sumner  lost  no  time,  in 
seeing  him  and  mentioning  the  subject.  They  met  almost  daily 
and  the  subject  was  repeatedly  talked  over.  Sumner  was  fearful 
of  the  future,  in  the  new  President's  hands,  and  he  a  Souther 
ner,  realizing  that,  though  the  hard,  costly  war  was  over,  the 
fruits  of  it  still  remained  to  be  gathered.  Sumner  did  not  wish 
to  see  rebels  restored  to  place  and  power  without  some  guarantee 
for  the  future.  He  feared  that  the  President,  who  had  been 
kept  from  Washington,  during  the  previous  three  years,  by  his 
duties  as  Military  Governor  of  Tennessee,  was  too  little  familiar 
with  the  work  in  Congress,  upon  reconstruction.  Indeed  subse 
quent  events  showed  that  President  Johnson,  at  this  time,  had 
no  fixed  convictions  of  his  own,  upon  this  question. 

During  the  first  few  weeks  in  the  office,  in  the  numerous  off 
hand  speeches  that  he  made,  he  talked  much  of  treason  and  the 
punishment  of  those  who  had  been  in  rebellion, — so  much,  that 
it  became  monotonous  to  thoughtful  men,  who  knew  that  the 
class  was  too  large  to  think  of  such  a  course.  But  he  said  noth 
ing  of  reconstruction.  Chief  Justice  Chase  suggested  to  Sumner 
that  they  try  to  give  him  another  topic.  Together  they  called  on 
him  and  urged  him  to  say  something  for  the  equal  rights  of  the 
colored  men.  He  seemed  somewhat  reserved,  but  not  more  so 
than  his  position  would  suggest.  The  Chief  Justice  afterwards 
remarked  how  his  countenance  lighted  up,  when  Sumner  ap 
pealed  to  him  to  carry  out  the  Declaration  of  Independence. 
They  both  left  him  satisfied  of  his  good  intentions.  A  few  days 
later,  in  a  conversation  with  Sumner  alone,  he  assured  him- 
there  was  no  difference  between  them  on  the  suffrage  question. 
Sumner  expressed  his  gratification  at  this  declaration  of  the 
President  and  added  the  hope  that  there  should  be  no  division 
of  the  great  Union  party,  that  there  should  not  be  some  called 
"the  President's  friends,"  and  others,  "the  opposition,"  but 
that  all  should  be  kept  together.  The  President  promptly 
replied,  "  I  mean  to  keep  you  all  together."  In  describing  his 
feelings  afterwards,  Sumner  said,  as  he  walked  away  from  that 
interview  with  the  President,  he  felt  that  the  battle  of  his  life 
was  ended.  If  the  President  declared  himself  for  the  equal 
rights  of  all,  he  thought  the  cause  would  be  carried  by  his  in 
fluence. 

But  at  another  time  when  the  case  of  Tennessee  was  dis- 


528  LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

cussed,  Simmer  urged  the  President  to  use  his  influence  for  the 
establishment  of  equal  suffrage,  in  the  State,  so  that  it  could  be 
used  as  an  example,  to  which  the  other  returning  States  could 
be  made  to  conform.  But  to  this,  the  President  made  answer, 
that  if  he  were  at  Nashville  he  would  see  this  accomplished. 
This  hesitation  disturbed  Sumner.  It  appeared  to  him  like  a 
disposition  to  evade  the  question.  Suinner  answered  him  that 
though  at  Washington,  the  President  had  the  long  end  of  the 
lever,  with  which,  by  his  power  and  merely  expressing  his  desire, 
he  could  control  measures  even  at  Nashville.  Sumner  recurred 
to  the  subject  again,  with  the  President,  when  about  to  leave 
Washington,  for  the  summer.  It  was  about  the  middle  of  May. 
He  apologized  for  returning  to  the  subject  so  often.  But  the 
President  interrupted  him  pleasantly  with  the  question,  "  Have 
I  not  always  listened  to  you  ?  "  Sumner  promptly  replied  that 
he  had.  He  then  proceeded,  at  some  length,  to  point  out  to  the 
President  the  manner  in  which  his  temporary  power,  as  Com- 
mander-in-Chief  of  the  Army,  over  a  district  under  military 
control,  could  be  exercised,  viz.,  by  controlling  the  newspapers 
by  choosing,  as  Military  Governors,  men  of  known  devotion  to 
equal  rights  so  as  to  educate  the  people  for  it,  by  encouraging 
the  people  of  the  South  to  engage  in  useful  labor  and  abstain 
from  politics,  and  thus,  keeping  the  district  under  good  in 
fluences,  to  hand  over  the  subject  of  reconstruction  and  equal 
rights  to  Congress,  where  it  properly  belonged.  The  President 
listened  to  it  all  attentively  and  received  it,  in  perfect  kindness. 
Sumner  went  home  feeling  there  would  be  no  trouble,  so  far  as 
President  Johnson  was  concerned.  He  assured  friends,  that 
he  met  and  with  whom  he  conversed,  on  the  subject,  in  Boston, 
that  the  President  was  in  harmony  with  his  views  and  that  the 
cause  of  equal  rights  was  safe,  in  his  hands. 
.  But  by  the  first  of  June,  less  than  two  weeks  after  Sumner 
left  Washington,  all  these  hopes  were  dashed,  by  two  public 
proclamations  of  the  President.  They  were  issued  on  the 
twenty-ninth  day  of  May.  The  first  was  a  proclamation  of 
amnesty  and  pardon  to  all  Eebels,  excepting  however  certain 
classes,  who  by  reason  of  their  rank  or  the  aggravated  character 
of  their  acts  were  deemed  most  guilty,  but  even  these  were  en 
couraged  to  apply  to  the  President,  for  a  specific  pardon.  In 
less  than  nine  months,  from  the  date  of  the  proclamation,  nearly 
fourteen  thousand  of  the  most  prominent  men  in  the  South, 
applied  for  and  received  these  individual  pardons,  from  the 
President.  By  this  means  a  constituency  of  qualified  voters 
was  created  in  the  South.  The  second  proclamation  was  to  ap 
point  William  W.  Holden  provisional  Governor  of  North  Caro- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  520 

lina,  who  was  to  assemble  a  convention  to  amend  the  constitu-- 
tion  and  exercise  the  powers  necessary  to  enable  the  loyal  people 
to  restore  the  State  to  its  constitutional  relation  to  the  Federal 
Government.  This  proclamation  confined  the  right  to  vote  to 
those  white  men  who  were  qualified  under  the  laws  of  North 
Carolina,  at  the  commencement  of  the  war,  thus  at  one  blow 
ending  the  question  of  equal  suffrage  to  the  blacks  and  placing 
the  whole  matter  in  the  hands  of  the  men  who  had  lately  been 
in  rebellion.  Both  of  these  proclamations  assumed  the  power 
of  the  President  to  dispose  of  the  whole  subject  of  reconstruc 
tion  and  ignored  the  authority  of  Congress  over  it.  The  Sec 
retary  of  the  Treasury  was  directed  to  nominate  collectors  of 
customs,  the  Postmaster-General  to  establish  post-offices,  the 
United  States  Judges  to  hold  courts,  and  the  Attorney-General 
to  enforce  the  administration  of  justice,  in  all  matters  within 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Federal  courts.  On  June  thirteenth,  a 
similar  proclamation  was  issued  to  reconstruct  the  government 
of  Mississippi,  with  William  L.  Sharkey  as  Governor;  on  June 
seventeenth  one  for  Georgia,  with  James  Johnson  for  Gov 
ernor;,  on  June  twenty-first,  one  for  Alabama,  with  Lewis  E. 
Parsons  for  Governor;  on  June  thirtieth,  one  for  South  Caro 
lina,  with  Benjamin  F.  Perry  for  Governor;  on  July  thirteenth, 
one  for  Florida  with  William  Marvin  for  Governor.  These  were 
all  on  the  same  plan  as  North  Carolina. 

It  is  interesting  to  note,  who  some  of  the  Governors  were,  in 
order  to  see  whether  the  President  had  followed  Sumner's  ad 
vice,  to  appoint  men  known  for  devotion  to  equal  rights,  so  that 
their  names  alone  would  be  a  proclamation, — men  like  Carl 
Schurz  whom  Sumner  suggested  for  one.  Holden,  appointed 
Governor  of  North  Carolina,  was  a  member  of  the  convention 
which  adopted  the  ordinance  of  secession  and  he  signed  that 
article.  Perry,  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina,  held  a  judicial 
position  under  the  Kebel  Government  and  was  one  of  its  Com 
missioners  of  Impressments.  Parsons,  Governor  of  Alabama, 
was  a  member  of  the  Confederate  Legislature  of  that  State  and 
introduced  in  it  resolutions,  thanking  Jefferson  Davis  "  for 
his  good  labors  in  the  cause  of  our  common  country,  together 
with  the  assurance  of  continued  support." 

The  President  recognized  the  Pierpont  government  of  Vir 
ginia,  sitting  at  Alexandria,  whose  Senators  had  already  been 
refused  seats  in  the  United  States  Senate,  and  whose  records 
and  archives,  Thaddeus  Stevens  afterwards  said,  were  taken,  at 
the  close  of  the  war,  to  Richmond,  in  an  ambulance.  President 
Lincoln's  "  ten  per  cent,  governments  "  in  Louisiana,  Arkansas 
and  Tennessee  were  all  of  them  recognized  as  legal,  though  as 


530  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

we  have  seen,  the  Senators  of  Louisiana  and  Arkansas  had  been 
rejected  by  the  Senate,  and  those  from  Tennessee  had  not  yet 
applied  for  their  seats,  but  would  certainly  meet  the  same  fate, 
when  they  did. 

Thus,  within  three  months  after  Johnson  assumed  the  duties 
of  the  Presidency,  his  whole  scheme  of  reconstruction  had  been 
worked  out  and  put  in  operation.  He,  in  this,  showed  the  merit 
of  dispatch,  at  least, — if  dispatch  be  a  merit,  in  the  disposition 
of  such  weighty  concerns.  The  President  had  accomplished,  in 
three  months,  what  Congress  had  already  wrestled  with,  for 
much  of  two  years,  and  was  destined  to  struggle  with  for  several 
years  to  come. 

But  it  was  apparent,  that,  if  the  work  of  the  President  stood, 
the  freedmen  had  no  chance  of  improvement.  Their  old 
masters  before  the  war,  were  thus  restored  to  power.  The  same 
men,  who  held  the  ballot  then  held  it  now.  Their  disposition 
towards  the  colored  men  had  not  changed.  They  could  not  be 
expected  to  place  the  ballot  in  the  hands  of  men  who  had  lately 
been  their  slaves  and  been  given  freedom  as  the  result  of  a  gi 
gantic  war,  in  which  they  had  been  conquered.  They  could  only 
be  expected  to  perpetuate  themselves  in  power,  and  this  could 
certainly  be  best  accomplished  by  keeping  the  colored  men  out. 
The  danger  was  that  they  would  go  farther  and  by  hostile  leg 
islation  reduce  them  to  a  condition  of  peonage  and  thus  the 
hope  of  men,  like  Sumner,  be  blasted,  that  the  colored  men  if 
given  the  ballot,  would  be  able  to  take  care  of  themselves  and 
strengthen  the  Union. 

The  immediate  results  showed  that  these  fears  were  well- 
founded.  Instead  of  drafting  new  constitutions  adapted  to  the 
changed  conditions  in  the  South  the  constitutional  conventions 
in  the  reconstructed  States  took  their  old  ones,  made  a  few 
changes  and  readopted  them,  with  all  their  odious  class  distinc 
tions.  One  thing  they  uniformly  did,  was  to  abolish  slavery. 
But  for  this,  they  could  hardly  claim  credit,  for  it  was  now 
apparent  it  would  soon  be  abolished  by  the  amendment  to  the 
Federal  Constitution,  which  had  been  proposed  by  Congress 
and  was  being  promptly  ratified  by  the  States.  President  John 
son,  indeed,  advised  them  to  admit,  to  the  right  of  suffrage  the 
colored  men  who  could  read  and  write  and  such  as  owned  and 
paid  taxes  on  property  valued  at  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars, 
but  in  the  same  letter,  that  he  advised  this,  he  gave  as  his  reason 
that  it  was  to  placate  "  the  Radicals  who  were  wild  upon  negro 
franchise  "  and  would  foil  their  attempt  to  exclude  Senators  and 
Representatives,  elected  in  the  reconstructed  States,  from  Con 
gress.  He  showed  both  his  private  feeling  on  the  question 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  531 

and  the  unworthiness  of  his  motive  in  suggesting  what  he 
did.  But  he  virtually  said  to  the  South;  this  question  is 
all  in  your  hands,  to  do  with  it  as  you  may  deem  best;  the 
nation  cannot  control  you  in  your  solution  of  it.  And  having 
given  them  this  cue  he  could  hardly  have  a  doubt  what  they 
would  do.  They  promptly  accepted  the  hint  and  did  what  they 
felt  the  President  in  reality  wished,  left  them  all  without  the 
franchise. 

The  results  were  soon  seen.  The  offices  were  quickly  filled, 
with  men  who  had  lately  been  prominent  in  the  Kebellion. 
Raphael  Semmes,  the  commander  of  the  Rebel  vessel,  the 
Alabama,  was  chosen  a  Probate  Judge  in  the  State  whose  name 
that  ship  had  carried  so  long  and  so  widely  and  with  such 
disastrous  results  to  the  North.  Herschel  V.  Johnson,  a  Con 
federate  Senator,  and  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  Vice-President 
of  the  Confederacy,  were  sent  to  the  United  States  Senate  from 
Georgia.  In  New  Orleans  the  man  who  was  Mayor,  when  the 
city  was  captured  from  the  Confederacy,  was  returned  to  that 
office  under  reconstruction.  The  war  had  impoverished  many 
of  these  men,  others  were  crippled  and  maimed  and  the  South, 
while  appreciating  the  cause,  in  which  they  suffered,  had  no 
other  means  to  reward  them  than  this.  The  failure  of  their 
undertaking  left  a  pension  out  of  the  question.  So  long  as  their 
section  remained  in  the  control  of  its  ancient  masters  they  had 
all  these  offices  at  their  disposal.  If  the  colored  people,  largely 
in  the  majority  in  many  of  the  election  districts,  were  given 
the  suffrage  and  they  chose  to  exercise  their  right,  this  power 
to  dispose  of  them  would  be  taken  away. 

These  results,  rapidly  brought  about,  by  President  Johnson, 
were  viewed  with  consternation  by  the  advocates  of  equal  suf 
frage,  in  the  Senate  and  House,  now  at  their  homes,  during  the 
recess  of  Congress.  Their  effect  upon  Sumner  can  easily  be 
imagined.  He  had  left  Washington  feeling  that  the  President 
was  sound  upon  the  subject  of  reconstruction  and  that  the 
rights  of  the  freedmen  were  safe  in  his  hands.  He  had  so 
assured  his  friends  upon  his  return  to  Boston.  He  was  now  con 
vinced  otherwise.  The  revelation  came  with  stunning  effect. 
Many  Republicans  had  not  yet  reached  the  conclusion  that 
equal  suffrage  should  be  accorded  the  freedmen.  To  them,  the 
President's  position  did  not  seem  of  so  much  importance.  They 
hardly  differed  from  him.  Public  opinion  upon  the  question 
was  still  so  unsettled  that  the  President  was  hopeful  of  carrying 
the  body  of  the  Republicans  with  him.  When  he  issued  his 
proclamation,  he  did  not  expect  to  break  with  his  party.  He 
evidently  thought  then,  he  could  carry  with  him  all  of  it, 


532  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

except  a  few  of  radical  views  like  Sumner,  Wade  and  Thaddeus 
Stevens.  But  the  sentiment  was  growing.  Sumner  was  leading 
it.  He  was  determined.  To  him  more  than  to  any  other  the 
colored  people  owe  the  right  of  suffrage  which  they  now  enjoy. 

The  inquiry  naturally  suggests  itself,  how  did  the  President 
come  to  make  this  sudden  and  radical  departure  from  the  views 
he  had  early  expressed  to  Sumner  and  repeated  to  others.  The 
answers  are  various.  No  one  of  them  can  certainly  be  said  to 
be  altogether  correct.  One,  that  obtained  a  good  deal  of  credit, 
is  that  when  Johnson  took  the  oath  of  office,  as  Vice-President, 
he  appeared  publicly  intoxicated  and,  continuing  so  after 
wards,  he  was  taken  charge  of  by  Preston  King,  a  Senator  from 
New  York,  and  the  Blairs,  father  and  son,  of  Maryland.  He 
was  taken  to  the  home  of  the  latter,  at  Silver  Springs,  a  few 
miles  from  the  city  of  Washington,  and  cared  for  until  his 
recovery.  Hence  arose  a  friendship,  which  counted  for  much, 
upon  his  accession  to  the  Presidency,  a  few  weeks  later.  They 
were  opposed  to  equal  suffrage.  The  President  may  have  felt 
some  bitterness  towards  other  Eepublicans,  who  had  witnessed 
and  commented  severely  on  his  lapse.  Sumner,  who  was  always 
swift  to  condemn  such  an  exhibition,  by  a  public  man,  said 
privately,  at  the  time,  that  he  ought  to  be  waited  on,  by  a  com 
mittee,  and  asked  to  resign.  Such  remarks  may  have  been 
repeated  to  the  President  by  persons  interested  in  controlling 
him. 

Another  explanation,  and  I  think  a  better  one,  is  this.  When 
Johnson  came  to  the  Presidency  he  had  no  well-fixed  opinions 
of  his  own,  upon  reconstruction.  His  mind  had  been  occupied 
with  the  war  and  the  treatment  of  the  rebels.  The  death  of 
President  Lincoln  coming  with  startling  suddenness  and  elevat 
ing  him  to  the  dizzy  heights  of  the  Presidency,  without  time  for 
meditation,  he  talked  a  good  deal  at  random  during  his  first 
weeks  in  the  office.  Indeed  his  speeches  were  not  generally 
creditable  to  him,  during  the  Presidency.  About  the  time 
Sumner  left  Washington,  Secretary  Seward  was  recovering 
sufficiently  from  his  injuries,  to  give  attention  to  public  busi 
ness.  The  President  had  his  first  official  business  with  him  on 
May  tenth.  Nine  days  later,  they  met  at  the  State  Department. 
From  this  time  forward,  they  were  together  often.  Seward 
admitted  he  advised  the  President  to  pursue  this  policy.  He 
was  afterwards  an  open  supporter  of  it.  No  one  who  knew  the 
Secretary  intimately,  doubted  his  power  of  persuasion,  in 
private  conversation.  It  was  said  by  those  best  able  to  judge, 
that  notwithstanding  his  great  ability  at  the  bar  and  on  the 
stump,  this  was  his  greatest  gift.  He  doubtless  had,  in  his 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  533 

own  mind,  to  signalize  his  return  to  health,  by  persuading  the 
President  to  issue  a  proclamation  of  amnesty  and  pardon  to 
those  who  had  been  in  rebellion.  It  would  appear  a  graceful 
act  for  one  who  had  been  so  near  death's  door,  at  the  hand  of 
an  assassin.  He  doubtless  pictured  to  the  President  the  pecul 
iar  propriety  of  his  doing  it.  He  had  been  born  and  reared  in 
the  South,  it  had  always  been  his  home.  He  had  taken  a  manly 
part  in  opposing  secession,  had  pointed  out  its  fearful  con 
sequences  ;  now  too  sadly  realized.  He  had  bravely  maintained 
the  Union  against  a  mad  career  that  he  could  not  control,  and 
had  prevailed.  It  would  be  a  graceful  act  for  him,  now  at  the 
height  of  power,  to  forgive  his  erring  brothers.  Did  not  the 
President  also  see  that  it  would  secure  him  the  favor  of  the  old 
slave-holding  class,  who  had  always  held  aloof  from  him,  as  the 
offspring  of  the  poor  white  class,  and  not  the  equal  of  their  set  ? 
He  had  struggled  to  power  against  them,  but  their  praises  now 
would  be  sweet;  and  it  would  be  sweeter  still,  when  his  official 
life  was  ended,  to  return  to  their  midst  and  enjoy  a  homage 
to  which  distance  thus  far  had  always  lent  enchantment.  In 
the  hands  of  a  skilful  diplomat  as  Seward  undoubtedly  was, 
the  situation  furnished  many  suggestions  that  could  be  forcibly 
plied.  Doubtless  more  than  any  other,  the  Secretary  is  to  be 
held  responsible  for  the  change  wrought  in  the  opinions  of  the 
President.  Sumner  himself  attributed  the  change  to  Preston 
King,  the  Blairs  and  the  Secretary. 

The  serious  question  with  Sumner  was  how  to  remedy  the 
evil  that  was  being  done,  Congress  not  being  in  session  and 
several  months  remaining  before  it  would  reconvene.  It  was 
suggested  that  he  go  on  to  Washington  to  interview  the  Presi 
dent  ;  but  he  felt  it  was  too  late.  The  mischief  was  done  before 
he  knew  of  it.  The  proclamations  furnished  him  the  first  in 
formation.  But  he  went  promptly  to  work  in  other  ways.  In 
his  eulogy  on  Lincoln,  delivered  only  two  days  after  the  date  of 
the  first  proclamations,  at  the  risk  of  criticism,  he  boldly 
referred  to  and  briefly  advocated  equal  rights  and  suffrage  for 
colored  men.  Copious  extracts  from  the  eulogy  were  published, 
in  the  newspapers,  and  were  widely  read,  thus  calling  attention 
to  the  subject  and  giving  early  direction  to  public  sentiment  in 
Massachusetts.  He  wrote  several  letters  during  the  summer, 
which  were  published,  in  which  he  expressed  himself  for  equal 
rights,  including  suffrage  for  the  colored  people.  One  of  these 
was  to  the  Mayor  of  Boston,  in  response  to  an  invitation  to 
deliver  the  city  oration  on  the  fourth  day  of  July ;  another,  to  a 
committee  of  colored  men  of  Savannah,  Georgia,  who  had  for 
warded  him  a  petition  for  the  right  to  vote  "  signed  personally 


534  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

by  their  own  hands/'  as  they  pathetically  described  it.  In  his 
reply  Sumner  urged  them  to  never  neglect  their  work,  but 
meanwhile  prepare  themselves  for  citizenship  and  to  be  assured 
their  rights  would  be  protected.  He  wrote  more  at  length  and 
more  emphatically  on  the  subject  to  the  New  York  Independent. 
In  this  letter  he  said,  "  President  Johnson  spoke  well,  when  in 
Tennessee  he  said  that,  '  in  the  work  of  reorganization  Rebels 
must  take  back  seats,  leaving  place  to  those  who  have  been 
loyal/  There  is  a  keynote  of  a  just  policy,  which  I  trust  Con 
gress  will  adopt.  It  is  difficult  to  measure  the  mischief  already 
accumulated  from  the  policy  that  has  been  pursued." 

On  the  fourteenth  of  September,  Sumner  was  unanimously 
elected  Chairman  of  the  Massachusetts  Republican  Convention, 
held  at  Worcester,  and  made  the  opening  speech,  of  an  hour's 
length.  It  was  a  carefully  prepared  argument  for  equal  rights. 
He  said  he  had  expected  when  he  made  his  last  speech,  in  the 
preceding  campaign  for  Lincoln  and  Johnson,  that  it  would  be 
his  last  anti-slavery  speech,  but  now  he  was  sad  to  learn  it  was 
not,  that  slavery  had  been  abolished  only  in  name  and  that  the 
work  of  liberation  would  not  be  complete  until  equal  rights 
were  secured,  that  a  righteous  government  could  not  be  founded 
on  any  exclusion  of  race,  that  he  did  not  know  how  others 
might  feel,  but,  as  for  him,  his  course  was  fixed,  that  he  pro 
posed  to  battle  on  to  the  end  and  until  all  distinction  of  caste 
were  abolished,  if  it  took  what  remained  to  him  of  life.  The 
convention  unanimously  passed  a  resolution  calling  upon  Con 
gress  to  see  that  the  most  perfect  guarantees,  for  the  safety  of 
all  loyal  people,  both  white  and  black,  were  secured,  before  the 
people  of  the  South  were  restored  to  their  forfeited  rights. 
Sumner's  friend,  Richard  Cobden,  who  had  been  such  a  tower 
of  strength  in  preventing  hostile  measures  being  taken  against 
us,  by  England,  during  the  war,  had  died,  on  the  second  of  the 
preceding  April.  His  last  letter  to  Sumner  was  written  just  a 
month  before  his  death.  In  reviewing  the  course  of  Europe 
towards  us,  he  wrote  to  Sumner.  "  It  is  nothing  but  your  great 
power  that  has  kept  the  hands  of  Europe  off  you."  The  Con 
vention  passed  a  resolution  commemorative  of  him,  as  one  of 
our  country's  most  earnest  and  devoted  friends,  and  directed 
Sumner  to  communicate  it  to  his  family.  This  he  did  in  a 
letter,  conveying  also  an  expression  of  his  personal  loss. 

During  this  vacation  Sumner  also  prepared  an  article  en 
titled,  Clemency  and  Common  Sense,  a  curiosity  of  literature, 
with  a  moral.  It  was  published,  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  for 
December,  1865.  Its  purpose  was  to  reach  a  different  class  and 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  535 

advocate,  in  another  form,  the  necessity  of  requiring  from  the 
South  guarantees  commensurate  with  the  danger  and  not  permit 
a  return  of  its  States,  to  their  former  place,  without  first  hav 
ing  equal  rights  secured  to  the  freedmen.  It  was  an  effort  in 
still  another  way  to  counteract  the  work  of  the  President. 

It  will  be  observed  that,  in  all  his  work  thus  far  to  prevent 
the  success  of  the  President's  plan,  for  the  restoration  of  the 
Southern  States,  with  their  old  class  distinctions  and  without 
protection  for  the  freedmen,  Sumner  had  avoided  antagonizing 
him  openly.  Knowing  the  disposition  of  Congress  to  agree  with 
the  President,  he  was  careful  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  a 
rupture.  He  still  had  some  hope  of  an  agreement,  when  Con 
gress  convenedi  Till  then  he  was  determined,  while  protecting 
his  cause,  to  cast  no  obstructions  in  the  way  of  harmonious 
action  between  the  two  departments  of  the  Government. 

Sumner  also  addressed  letters  to  members  of  the  Cabinet, 
asking  them  to  stand  firm  against  the  Presidential  policy.  But 
they  were  still  hoping  to  avoid  a  break  with  him  and  were  un 
willing  to  commit  themselves  openly  against  it.  In  fact,  they 
were  about  evenly  divided.  Seward,  Secretary  of  State ;  Welles, 
Secretary  of  the  Navy;  M'Cullouch,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
were  with  the  President,  Dennison,  Postmaster-General,  was 
uncommitted;  while  Speed,  Attorney-General;  Harlan,  Secre 
tary  of  the  Interior  and  Stanton,  Secretary  of  War  were  against 
his  new  policy.  But  a  crisis  was  approaching  among  them. 
Speed,  Dennison  and  Harlan  were  soon  to  retire,  unable  to 
agree  with  the  President  and  unwilling  to  compromise  them 
selves  by  remaining.  Stanton,  under  the  advice  of  his  friends 
and  following  the  bent  of  his  own  fearless  and  aggressive  nature, 
was  disposed  to  remain  and  fight  it  out.  As  soon  as  the  election 
was  over  Sumner  appealed  directly  to  the  President,  by  a  long 
telegraphic  message,  as  a  faithful  friend  and  supporter  of  his 
administration,  urging  him  to  suspend  his  policy  towards  the 
Confederate  States,  because  it  was  abandoning  the  freedmen  to 
the  control  of  their  former  masters  and  was  exposing  the 
national  debt  to  the  danger  of  repudiation. 

Sumner  went  on  to  Washington,  for  the  opening  of  Congress, 
early,  so  as  to  have  a  talk  with  the  President.  He  reached  there 
on  Saturday,  December  second,  1865,  and  at  once  called  on  him 
and  spent  three  hours  in  his  company,  in  conference  about  the 
Southern  States.  The  contrast  between  his  attitude  then  and 
as  it  appeared  when  Sumner  had  left  him  for  the  summer,  a  few 
days  after  Johnson's  accession  to  the  Presidency,  was  pain 
ful  to  Sumner.  Instead  of  the  kindly  sympathetic  disposition 
he  then  saw,  he  found  the  President  now  "  harsh,  petulant  and 


536  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

unreasonable."  "  His  heart  was  with  the  ex-rebels.  For  the 
Unionist,  white  or  black,  who  had  borne  the  burden  of  the  war, 
he  had  little  feeling."  Sumner  said  that  the  States  lately  in 
rebellion  were  unfit  for  restoration  in  their  apparently  lawless 
condition,  without  some  guarantees  for  the  right  of  the  defence 
less  freedmen.  The  President  retorted :  "  Are  there  no  mur 
ders  in  Massachusetts  ?  "  "  Do  not  men,  in  Boston,  sometimes 
knock  each  other  down,  so  that  the  police  is  obliged  to  inter 
fere  ?  "  "  Would  you  consent  that  Massachusetts,  on  this  ac 
count  should  be  excluded  from  Congress  ?  "  Without  remarking 
on  the  irrelevancy  of  these  inquiries,  Sumner  left,  with  the  pain 
ful  conviction  that  he  was  "  set  as  flint  against  the  good  cause/' 
The  separation  was  final.  Each  was  thereafter  to  pursue  his 
own  course,  but  their  paths  were  to  be  widely  divergent. 

Congress  opened,  on  the  fourth  day  of  December.  The 
session  was  occupied  with  measures  of  Reconstruction,  especially 
suffrage  for  the  colored  race,  and  with  differences  with  the 
President,  which  were  to  culminate,  at  the  next  session  with 
his  impeachment.  On  the  first  day  of  the  session  Sumner  in 
troduced  ten  separate  measures,  all  of  them  bearing  upon  these 
questions — a  bill  to  secure  equal  suffrage  to  colored  men  in  the 
District  of  Columbia, — a  bill  to  secure  colored  representation  on 
juries,  in  the  Federal  courts,  in  cases  where  colored  persons  were 
to  be  indicted  or  tried, — one  to  require  an  oath  of  all  voters  or 
persons  elected  to  office,  in  the  States  lately  in  rebellion,  to 
maintain  the  debt  contracted  by  the  Government  in  the  war  for 
the  Union  to  uphold  the  Union  and  to  resist  all  laws  making  a 
distinction  of  race  or  color  or  that  prevented  all  men  from  en 
joying  equal  protection  or  rights, — another  to  make  all  persons 
in  the  Confederate  States  equal  before  the  law  whether  in  the 
Court  Room  or  at  the  ballot  box, — another  to  supply  appropriate 
legislation,  to  enforce  the  amendment  to  the  Constitution  pro 
hibiting  slavery, — a  joint  resolution  proposing  an  amendment  to 
the  Constitution  apportioning  representatives  in  Congress 
among  the  States  according  to  the  number  of  male  citizens 
twenty-one  years  of  age, — a  bill  for  Reconstruction  on  the  basis 
of  equal  rights, — a  resolution  declaring  the  adoption  of  the  con 
stitutional  amendment  prohibiting  slavery, — a  resolution  de 
claring  five  conditions  of  Reconstruction,  loyalty,  the  enfran 
chisement  of  all  citizens,  without  distinction  of  race  or  color,  re 
jection  of  the  Rebel  debt  and  the  adoption  of  the  National  debt, 
an  educational  system  for  the  equal  benefit  of  all  races — the 
choice  of  loyal  citizens  for  office  State  and  National, — a  resolu 
tion  declaring  the  duty  of  Congress  to  protect  loyal  people  of 
the  South  of  all  races,  in  their  efforts  for  Reconstruction. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  537 

These  bills  were  read,  passed  to  a  second  reading  and  ordered 
printed.  The  resolutions  were  read  and  ordered  printed  and 
entered  at  length  on  the  journal  of  the  Senate.  Sumner's  pur 
pose  was  to  present  them  early  and  thus  make  them  guides  to 
future  legislation.  The  standing  committees  of  the  Senate 
were  formed  by  the  dominant  party  acting  on  the  report  of  its 
nominating  committee.  Sumner  was  a  member  of  this  nominat 
ing  committee.  When  the  formation  of  the  Committee  on  the 
District  of  Columbia  was  under  consideration,  Sumner  said  his 
only  wish  was  that  it  be  so  constituted  that  it  would  report  in 
favor  of  suffrage  for  colored  men  in  the  District.  Then,  an 
swered  Sherman,  you  must  go  on  the  Committee.  Sumner 
answered  he  was  very  much  occupied  with  the  duties  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  but  if  placed  on  this  one  he 
would  not  decline.  He  was  accordingly  made  a  member  of  the 
Committee  on  the  District  and  continued  on  it  till  relieved  of 
all  committee  work  at  his  own  request,  in  1872.  A  bill  for 
equal  suffrage  was  promptly  reported  by  this  committee.  It 
did  not  become  a  law  at  this  session,  but  at  the  next  it  was 
passed  and  was  vetoed  by  the  President  and  then  repassed  by  a 
two-thirds  vote  of  both  Houses  and  thus  became  a  law. 

Sumner's  bill  for  Reconstruction,  on  the  basis  of  equal  rights 
deserves  more  than  a  passing  notice.  Nothing  as  complete  and 
systematic  was  ever  adopted.  The  legislation  upon  this  sub 
ject  was  piecemeal  and  much  of  it  bungling.  Sumner's  bill 
provided  for  the  appointment  of  a  Provisional  Governor  for 
each  Confederate  State,  to  be  appointed  by  the  President,  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  Under  the  direction  of 
this  Governor,  the  United  States  Marshal  was  to  name  dep 
uties  to  enroll  all  male  citizens  of  the  United  States,  resident 
of  the  State,  in  their  counties  and  request  each  one  to  take  an 
oath  to  maintain  a  republican  form  of  government,  for  the  State 
of  which  he  was  a  resident,  to  recognize  the  permanency  of  the 
National  Government,  to  resist  any  attempt  to  repudiate  any 
of  the  debts  contracted  in  suppressing  the  Rebellion  and  to  re 
sist  all  laws  making  any  distinction  of  race  or  color. 

The  deputy  was  to  make  one  roll  of  those  who  took  the  oath 
and.  another  of  those  who  refused  to  take  it.  If  a  majority  of 
the  persons  enrolled  in  the  State  took  the  oath,  the  Governor 
was  to  invite  the  loyal  people  of  the  State  to  elect  delegates  to 
a  convention  to  re-establish  the  State  Government  in  conformity 
with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  The  number  of 
members  of  the  convention  was  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  both 
Houses  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  before  secession,  and 
were  to  be  elected  by  the  loyal  male  voters,  twenty-one  years 


538  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

of  age,  resident  of  the  county.  The  delegates  were  to  have  the 
same  qualifications  and  to  be  chosen  at  elections  held  by  com 
missioners  appointed  by  the  Governor.  Every  person  voting 
was  to  take  the  foregoing  oath,  but  any  person  known  to  have 
held  office  civil  or  military  under  the  Confederate  or  Secession 
State  Government  or  who  had  borne  arms  against  the  United 
States  was  to  be  excluded  from  voting,  unless  it  was  shown  by 
the  testimony  of  a  qualified  voter  that  he  had  done  so  involun 
tarily.  The  Governor  was  to  canvass  the  vote,  declare  the  per 
sons  elected,  by  proclamation  convene  the  delegates,  administer 
the  above  oath  to  them  and  preside  over  their  deliberations. 

If  the  convention  declared  its  submission  to  the  United 
States  Government  and  incorporated  in  its  State  Constitution 
provisions,  forbidding  persons  who  held  any  office  civil,  except 
ministerial,  or  military  above  the  rank  of  colonel,  to  vote  for 
or  be  a  member  of  the  Legislature  or  Governor,  prohibiting 
slavery,  repudiating  the  Rebel  debt,  requiring  of  all  office 
holders  an  oath  to  support  the  Federal  Constitution  and  to 
maintain  a  republican  form  of  government,  abolishing  all  dis 
tinctions  founded  on  race  or  color  or  former  condition  and  mak 
ing  these  provisions  perpetual,  then  the  constitution  thus 
formed  was  to  be  submitted  to  the  voters.  The  Provisional 
Governor  was  to  canvass  the  votes  and,  if  a  majority  were  in  its 
favor,  to  so  certify  to  the  President,  who  after  obtaining  the 
consent  of  Congress  was  to  proclaim  the  State  Government 
established  and  permit  Senators,  Representatives  and  Presi 
dential  Electors  to  be  chosen. 

If  the  Convention  refused  to  establish  such  a  government,  it 
was  to  be  the  duty  of  the  Provisional  Governor  to  collect  taxes 
and  execute  the  laws  of  the  State,  as  they  were  before  the  pas 
sage  of  the  ordinance  of  secession,  except  as  in  conflict  with  the 
existing  laws  and  constitution  of  the  United  States,  the  laws 
made  for  white  persons  to  apply  to  all  races  and  all  jurors  to 
have  the  qualification  of  voters  under  this  bill.  If  there  was 
any  surplus  of  taxes  collected  under  the  Provisional  Governor, 
after  payment  of  the  expenses  of  his  administration,  they  were 
to  be  deposited  in  the  United  States  Treasury,  to  be  repaid  to 
the  State  when  a  republican  form  of  government  should  be 
there  established  and  be  recognized  by  the  United  States.  On 
the  twenty-first  day  of  December,  on  motion  of  Sumner,  this 
bill  was  referred  to  the  Joint  Committee  of  the  Senate  and 
House  on  Reconstruction. 

In  this  scheme  for  reconstruction  two  things  are  clearly 
noticeable,  a  determination  to  keep  the  whole  matter  in  the 
hands  of  Congress,  so  that  the  new  President  would  everywhere 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  539 

find  a  check  upon  his  acts ;  and  a  determination  to  provide  for 
the  equal  rights  of  the  colored  race.  Sumner's  resolution  was 
fixed  on  both  questions.  He  would  neither  trust  this  important 
subject  with  the  President,  of  whose  perversity  he  was  now  per 
suaded;  nor  would  he  leave  the  freedmen  without  the  ballot, 
to  protect  them  against  the  aggressions  of  their  ancient  masters. 
The  President  was  to  appoint  the  Provisional  Governors,  but 
it  was  to  be  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  The 
President  was  to  recognize  the  new  government,  but  not  until  he 
obtained  the  consent  of  Congress.  The  surplus  taxes  were  to 
be  paid  back  to  the  States,  but  not  until  Congress  united  in  an 
appropriation  therefor.  He  was  just  as  exacting  about  the 
equal  rights  of  colored  men.  The  voters  were  to  be  sworn  to 
resist  all  laws  making  any  distinction  on  account  of  color  and 
to  maintain  a  government  where  all  men  should  be  equal. 
Colored  men  were  to  be  allowed  to  participate,  in  creating  these 
governments.  This  equality  was  to  be  incorporated  in  a  con 
stitution  that  was  to  make  it  perpetual.  The  officers  to  be 
elected  under  it  were  to  be  sworn  to  maintain  it. 

Sumner  distrusted  the  former  leaders  of  the  South  as  much 
as  he  did  the  President.  He  had  come  to  regard  both  as  be 
longing  to  one  class,  united  in  purpose  and  determined  to  act 
together.  When,  therefore,  Senator  Cowan  on  December 
twelfth,  1865,  submitted  a  resolution  asking  the  President  to 
furnish  information  of  the  condition  of  the  Southern  States, 
lately  in  Rebellion,  Sumner  moved  an  amendment  that  the 
President  also  furnish  copies  of  such  reports  as  he  may  have 
received  from  officers  or  agents  appointed  to  visit  these  States. 
The  President  in  response  to  the  call  sent  to  the  Senate  a 
message,  in  which  he  said  that  sectional  animosity  was  surely 
and  rapidly  merging  itself  into  a  spirit  of  nationality  and  that 
the  conditions  there  were  more  promising  than  could  well  have 
been  expected  in  view  of  all  the  circumstances.  Accompany- 
\  ing  the  message  were  reports  of  Lieutenant-General  Grant  and 
Major-General  Carl  Schurz.  Sumner  knew  that  Schurz  had 
been  appointed  by  the  President  to  visit  this  section  and  make  a 
detailed  report  to  him  of  the  result  of  his  investigations,  that 
in  pursuance  of  this  appointment  he  had  visited  South  Caro 
lina,  Georgia,  Alabama,  Mississippi  and  the  Department  of  the 
Gulf,  spending  about  four  months  in  a  careful  investigation  and 
report  upon  the  conditions  he  found  there.  Sumner  also  had 
reason  to  believe  this  report  was  unsatisfactory  to  the  Presi 
dent.  For  it  argued  an  entire  absence  of  national  feeling  on 
the  part  of  the  South,  a  submission  only  to  necessity,  a  promise 
of  a  new  form  of  servitude  to  take  the  place  of  slavery  now 


540  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

abolished  under  ordinances  passed  under  pressure  of  circum 
stances,  and  a  warning  that  practical  attempts  by  the  Southern 
people  to  deprive  the  negroes  of  their  rights  might  result  in 
bloody  collisions.  This  report  corresponded  with  the  infor 
mation  Sumner  had  from  private  sources  and  he  believed  it 
represented  the  actual  condition  of  the  South. 

The  report  of  General  Grant  was  radically  different,  both  in 
its  origin  and  its  substance.  There  was  reason  to  believe  that 
the  President,  learning  in  advance  from  letters  and  conversa 
tions  the  convictions  of  General  Schurz,  was  not  wishing  that 
kind  of  information  and,  seeing  an  opportunity  to  turn  the 
great  popularity  of  General  Grant  to  the  support  of  his  policy, 
he  requested  him,  as  he  was  starting  South,  on  a  tour  of  military 
inspection,  to  learn  the  feeling  and  intention  of  the  Southern 
States  towards  the  National  Government.  The  General  never 
thinking  that  his  report  would  be  made  a  subject  of  Congres 
sional  controversy,  complied  with  the  President's  request,  in  a 
merely  perfunctory  manner.  He  passed  through  Virginia,  with 
out  conversing  with  any  citizens,  spent  one  day  in  North  Caro 
lina,  one  in  South  Carolina  and  two  in  Georgia  and  upon  his 
return  to  Washington  made  a  brief  report,  upon  this  observation 
to  the  President.  He  probably  spoke  from  a  purely  military 
standpoint,  when  he  said  the  mass  of  thinking  men,  in  the 
South  accepted  the  situation,  in  good  faith,  and  that  there  was 
universal  acquiescence  in  the  authority  of  the  General  Govern 
ment,  with  anxiety  to  return  to  self-government,  within  the 
Union,  and  do  what  was  required  of  them  by  the  North  as  con 
ditions  of  restoration.  It  said  nothing  of  the  condition  of  the 
freedmen  or  whether  their  rights  were  respected  or  denied. 

When  the  message  of  the  President  and  these  two  accompany 
ing  reports  were  received  by  the  Senate,  on  December  nine 
teenth,  the  message  of  ihe  President  was  read  and  the  report  of 
General  Grant.  That  of  General  Schurz  was  not  read.  Sum 
ner  called  for  the  reading  of  it.  Several  senators  objected,  on 
account  of  its  length,  Sumner  insisted  that  it  was  a  very  import 
ant  document,  that  when  the  report  on  the  condition  of  Kansas 
was  made  before  the  war,  it  was  all  read,  that  now  the  question 
was  immeasurably  more  important.  "  We  have  a  message  from 
the  President,"  he  said,  "  which  is  like  the  whitewashing  mes 
sage  of  Franklin  Pierce,  with  regard  to  the  enormities  in  Kan 
sas.  Such  is  its  parallel.  I  think  the  Senate  had  better  at 
least  listen  to  the  opening  of  Major-General  Schurz's  report." 
The  President's  attitude  was  not  so  well  understood  then  as 
later  and  several  senators  objected  to  Sumner's  use  of  the  word 
"  whitewashing "  as  applied  to  his  message.  They  thought 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  541 

Sumner  ought  to  qualify  or  modify  or  retract  it.  Sumner  re 
plied  with  some  feeling  that  he  had  "  nothing  to  retract,  noth 
ing  to  modify,  nothing  to  qualify  "  that,  while  he  was  not  ques 
tioning  the  character  or  policy  of  the  President  as  some  of  his 
fellow  Senators  seemed  to  think,  he  was  characterizing  the  mes 
sage  as  he  thought  it  deserved.  Mr.  Fessenden  remarked  that 
"  the  difference  between  the  Senators  was  a  mere  matter  of  defi 
nitions  and  ought  to  be  referred  to  some  maker  of  dictiona 
ries."  Mr.  Sherman  moved  that  the  reading  be  dispensed  with 
as  he  preferred  to  read  it  for  himself  and  this  motion  prevailed 
and  the  message  and  reports  were  ordered  to  be  printed. 

The  incident  found  its  way  into  the  papers  and  became  a 
text  for  comments  according  to  the  opinions  of  the  editors.  It 
was  .the  occasion  of  letters  of  commendation  from  Sumner's 
friends.  Wendell  Phillips  wrote;  "Glorious!  just  the  truth, 
and  just  the  time  and  place  to  speak  it,  was  your  graphic  and 
most  effective  description  of  the  President's  message.  I  say 
this,  not  that  you  need  confirmation,  but  because,  hearing  the 
clamor  against  you,  it  seems  right  you  should  have  the  '  cheers  ' 
as  well  as  the  '  hisses/  J' 

The  day  after  the  "whitewashing"  incident,  December 
twentieth,  1865,  Sumner  took  the  floor  on  a  bill  introduced  by 
Senator  Wilson  "  to  maintain  freedom  in  the  States  in  Rebel 
lion,"  and  spoke  for  more  than  a  hour,  to  show  the  incorrectness 
of  the  conclusion  advanced  in  the  message  of  the  President  and 
the  accompanying  report  of  General  Grant.  He  occupied  the 
time  largely  in  reading  letters  from  private  individuals  who 
were  or  had  been  in  the  South.  The  letters  covered  the  South 
ern  situation  generally  and  the  condition  of  the  several  Confed 
erate  States.  They  argued  that  the  Southern  people  while  ad 
mitting  themselves  vanquished  by  arms  hoped  to  secure  suprem 
acy  in  the  National  Government,  by  political  management,  so 
as  to  control  its  affairs  as  they  had  done  before  the  war,  that 
they  were  opposed  to  the  payment  of  the  debt,  contracted  in  the 
maintenance  of  the  Union,  were  inflicting  cruelties  upon  de 
fenceless  colored  people  and  the  loyal  whites  in  the  South  and 
were  making  the  condition  of  the  former  much  worse  than  it 
was  when  they  were  in  slavery.  It  is  only  fairness  to  General 
Grant  to  add  that  a  fuller  investigation  afterwards  led  him  to 
the  same  conclusion  as  that  now  maintained  by  Sumner.  And 
later,  when  the  subject  became  one  of  the  great  issues  of  his 
party,  during  his  Presidency,  he  and  Sumner  stood  loyally 
together  upon  this  question. 

On  the  ninth  day  of  January,  1866,  Sumner  called  attention 
to  the  fact  that  freedmen  were  being  kidnapped  and  carried, 


542  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

from  the  South  to  Brazil  and  Cuba  where  they  were  sold  as 
slaves.  He  offered  a  resolution,  directing  the  Judiciary  Com 
mittee  to  inquire  if  further  legislation  were  needed  to  prevent 
this  revival  of  the  slave  trade.  That  committee  a  month  later 
reported  a  bill  to  prevent  and  punish  kidnapping  which  was 
passed  by  both  Houses  and,  with  the  approval  of  the  Presi 
dent,  became  a  law,  on  May  twenty-first. 

Sumncr  insisted  upon  the  equal  title  of  the  colored  people 
to  all  the  rights  of  the  white.  He  would  admit  of  no  distinc 
tion.  He  believed  that  Congress,  especially  after  the  adoption 
of  the  constitutional  amendment  prohibiting  slavery,  had  power 
to  secure  this  object,  by  direct  legislation.  Others  differed  from 
him  and  thought  it  should  be  accomplished,  by  a  constitutional 
amendment.  At  the  opening  of  the  session  a  joint  committee  on 
Reconstruction  had  been  appointed  by  the  two  Houses,  of  which 
Thaddeus  Stevens  was  the  House  Chairman  and  Fessenden  of 
Maine  was  the  Senate  Chairman.  This  Committee  reported 
to  the  House,  through  its  Chairman  Stevens,  a  proposition  for 
an  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  indirectly  reaching  the  ques 
tion  of  equal  suffrage.  It  was  known  from  the  name  of  its 
author,  James  G.  Blaine,  as  the  "  Elaine  Amendment."  It 
proposed,  in  language  different  from  what  was  afterwards  in 
corporated  in  the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  that  Representatives 
should  be  apportioned  among  the  States  according  to  numbers 
and  that  whenever  the  election  franchise  should  be  denied  by 
any  State  on  account  of  race  or  color,  all  persons  therein  of  such 
race  or  color  should  be  excluded  from  the  basis  of  representa 
tion.  The  joint  resolution  for  the  amendment  was  adopted  by 
the  House  on  January  thirty-first.  The  Senate  Chairman  of 
the  joint  committee  gave  notice  that  he  would  call  for  its  con 
sideration,  by  the  Senate,  on  February  fifth.  The  right  of  open 
ing  the  debate  belonged  to  him  as  Chairman  of  the  committee, 
but  he  yielded  the  floor  to  Simmer,  who  commenced  the  debate 
with  an  elaborate  speech,  running  into  two  days.  He  spoke 
for  about  two  hours  during  the  afternoon  of  each  day.  The 
printed  speech  entitled  "  Equal  Rights  of  All "  occupies  one 
hundred  pages  of  his  published  works.  It  is  one  of  the  most 
elaborately  prepared  speeches  he  ever  delievered. 

He  opposed  the  amendment.  He  insisted  that  in  the  Declara 
tion  of  Independence  as  well  as  in  the  Constitution,  no 
expression  had  been  permitted  to  contradict  the  foundation 
principle  of  our  government  that  all  men  are  created  equal.  To 
permit  this  amendment  to  be  inserted,  recognized  a  distinction 
based  upon  color  and  gave  the  choice  to  the  Southern  States 
to  refuse  the  black  race  the  ballot,,  if  they  were  willing  thereby 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  543 

to  reduce  the  number  of  their  own  Congressmen.  An  amend 
ment  should  be  an  improvement,  but'  this  was  like  the  crab, 
which  travelled  backward.  He  afterwards  declared  that  it  re 
minded  him  of  that  leg  of  mutton  served  for  Dr.  Johnson's 
dinner,  on  the  road  from  London  to  Oxford,  which  he  described : 
"as  bad,  as  bad  could  be, — ill-fed,  ill-killed,  ill-kept,  and  ill- 
dressed."  He  insisted  that  the  Constitution  required  the  United 
States  to  guarantee  to  every  state  a  republican  form  of  govern 
ment  and  likewise  that  Congress  should  enforce  the  prohibition 
of  slavery  by  appropriate  legislation.  He  therefore  offered,  by 
way  of  counter  proposition,  a  joint  resolution  declaring  all  per 
sons  equal  before  the  law,  whether  in  the  court-room  or  at  the 
ballot  box.  The  power  of  Congress  to  pass  such  a  law  he  believed 
to  be  ample  without  requiring  the  formality  of  a  constitutional 
amendment.  He  dwelt  at  great  length  upon  the  meaning  of 
the  terms  republican  form  of  government,  which  was  required 
by  the  Constitution  to  be  guaranteed  to  the  States.  He  argued 
that  it  meant  simply  a  government  where  all  men  are  equal 
in  rights,  and  which  derives  it  powers  from  the  consent  of  the 
governed  and  that  neither  existed,  where  black  men  were  de 
prived  of  the  right  of  suffrage,  that  when  they  were  taxed,  with 
out  being  permitted  to  vote,  it  was  the  same  taxation  without 
representation  that  our  fathers  had  pronounced  tyranny  and  had 
fought  against  in  our  war  for  Independence.  He  insisted  that 
the  rebel  states  were  not  republican,  that  it  was  the  duty  of 
Congress  to  see  that  they  were  made  so.  The  Constitution  re 
quired  it.  To  those,  therefore,  who  asked  to  amend  it,  he  could 
only  retort,  in  the  words  of  the  magistrate  to  an  advocate,  who, 
dissatisfied  with  the  ruling  of  the  court,  threatened  to  burn 
his  book,  "  Better  read  it."  The  equal  ballot  would  be  peace 
maker  and  reconciler  to  the  South  as  well  as  schoolmaster  and 
friend  to  the  negro.  Had  he  been  given  it  sooner,  we  could 
have  had  no  war,  for  his  vote  would  have  defeated  the  acts  of 
Secession.  We  owed  it  to  him,  because  in  the  time  of  War,  he 
had  aided  our  deliverance. 

The  speech  was  listened  to,  by  a  large  audience.  The 
Chamber  and  its  galleries  were  filled,  before  the  hour  for  open 
ing,  at  each  afternoon  session.  Senator  Pomeroy  of  Kansas,  in 
hearty  sympathy  with  Sumner,  in  his  efforts  for  equal  suff 
rage,  occupied  the  chair.  Many  members  of  the  House,  with 
Ministers  and  members  of  the  Foreign  Embassies,  two  Cabinet 
officers  and  others,  having  the  privileges  of  the  floor  came  in, 
to  occupy  seats  in  the  chamber.  Many  members  of  the  colored 
race,  among  them  some  soldiers  occupied  seats  in  the  gallery. 
He  was  frequently  interrupted  by  marks  of  approval  and  when, 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

on  the  second  day,  he  reached  his  close  the  vast  audience  burst 
into  applause.  It  was  some  minutes  before  the  Presiding 
Officer  could  secure  order. 

The  speech  had  less  of  the  controversial  spirit  in  it  than  most 
of  Sumner's.  It  was  full  of  the  subject  in  hand,  treating  it 
with  frankness,  alluding  to  the  views  of  his  opponents  with 
respect  and  with  fairness.  Its  effective  and  happy  illustra 
tions  aided  in  holding  the  interest  of  his  listeners.  It  was 
favorably  commented  upon  by  men  of  all  parties.  In  this 
respect  it  was  noticeably  different  from  some  of  his  earlier 
speeches  that  had  evoked  so  much  bitterness.  It  was  published 
in  the  Independent,  whose  proprietor,  Henry  C.  Bowen,  was 
among  his  auditors,  and  in  an  extra  of  the  New  York  Tribune ; 
was  largely  copied  into  other  papers ;  and  it  was  widely  read. 
It  noticeably  raised  the  tone  of  feeling  towards  equal  suffrage. 

These  speeches  made  by  Sumner  served  to  widen  the  breach 
between  President  Johnson  and  Congress.  The  President  was 
opposed  to  extending  the  right  of  suffrage  to  the  colored  men, 
believing  it  would  result  in  a  war  of  the  races.  He  stood 
ready,  therefore,  to  counteract  any  favorable  impression  that 
such  speeches  might  make.  On  the  day  after  the  delivery  of  this 
one,  he  was  visited  by  a  delegation  of  colored  men  who  urged 
him  to  use  his  influence  to  secure  suffrage  for  their  race.  He 
answered  with  feeling  that  he  was  the  friend  of  the  black  race 
and  that  he  did  not  like  to  be  arraigned  by  some  one,  who 
could  get  up  rounded  periods  and  deal  in  rhetoric,  but  who  had 
never  perilled  life,  liberty  or  property  for  them,  that  the  policy 
urged,  if  persisted  in,  he  believed  would  result  in  great  injury 
to  both  races  and  the  ruin  of  one  or  the  other.  He  said 
sneeringly  to  another  colored  delegation  that 'he  supposed  Sum 
ner  was  their  God.  From  the  steps  of  the  White  House,  on 
February  twenty-second,  he  threw  away  all  reserve.  On  the 
nineteenth  of  February  he  had  vetoed  the  Freedmen's  Bureau 
Bill,  designed  to  remedy  some  defects  in  the  law  passed  at  a 
previous  session.  The  President  had  before  vetoed  this  bill. 
After  some  changes  it  was  returned  to  him  again.  It  was  now 
certain,  as  changed,  to  pass  over  his  veto.  He  had  vetoed  the 
civil  rights  bill  and  it  had  been  passed  over  his  veto.  It  did 
not  take  a  careful  observer  to  see  that  a  deplorable  relation  of 
the  two  departments  of  the  government  was  impending. 

The  veto  of  the  Freedman's  Bureau  Bill  on  February  nine 
teenth  was  followed  on  February  twenty-second,  by  a  large  pop 
ular  meeting  in  Washington  to  approve  the  President's  action. 
It  adjourned  to  the  White  House,  to  congratulate  the  Presi 
dent.  He  met  them;  at  the  door,  and  made  a  speech  of  some 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  545 

length.  "  I  have,"  said  the  President,  in  the  course  of  his  re 
marks,  "  fought  traitors  and  treason  in  the  South.  I  opposed 
Davis,  Toombs,  Slidell  and  a  long  list  of  others,  whose  names  I 
need  not  repeat ;  and  now,  when  I  turn  around  at  the  other  end 
of  the  line,  I  find  men — I  care  not  by  what  name  you  call  them 
(a  voice:  '  Call  them  traitors') — who  still  stand  opposed  to 
the  restoration  of  the  Union  of  these  States.  (A  voice:  '  Give 
us  their  names.')  A  gentleman  calls  for  their  names.  Well! 
suppose  I  should  give  them  ?  I  look  upon  them  I  repeat  it  as 
President  or  citizen,  as  being  as  much  opposed  to  the  funda 
mental  principles  of  this  Government,  and  I  believe  they  are 
as  much  laboring  to  prevent  or  destroy  them  as  were  the  men 
who  fought  against  them  in  the  Eebellion.  (A  voice :  '  Give  us 
the  names.')  I  say  Thaddeus  Stevens  of  Pennsylvania.  (Tre 
mendous  applause.)  I  say  Charles  Sumner.  (Tremendous 
applause.)  I  say  Wendell  Phillips,  and  others  of  the  same 
stripe  are  among  them.  (A  voice:  '  Give  it  to  Forney.')  Some 
gentleman  in  the  crowd  says,  '  Give  it  to  Forney/  I  have  only  to 
say  I  do  not  waste  my  ammunition  upon  dead  ducks."  (Laugh 
ter  and  applause.)  *  *  *  Some  one  had  spoken  in  Congress  of 
the  Presidential  obstacle  to  be  gotten  out  of  the  way.  He  in 
terpreted  this  as  threatening  personal  violence  to  himself.  "  I 
make  use,"  he  said,  "  of  a  very  strong  expression  when  I  say  that 
I  have  no  doubt  the  intention  was  to  incite  assassination  and  so 
get  out  of  the  way  the  obstacle  to  place  and  power.  Whether 
by  assassination  or  not  there  are  individuals  in  this  Govern 
ment,  I  doubt  not,  who  want  to  destroy  our  institutions  and 
change  the  character  of  the  Government.  Are  they  not  satis 
fied  with  the  blood  that  has  been  shed  ?  Does  not  the  murder 
of  Lincoln  appease  the  vengeance  and  wrath  of  the  opponents  of 
this  Government  ?  Are  they  still  unslaked  ?  Do  they  still  want 
more  blood  ?  I  am  not  afraid  of  the  assassin  attacking  me, 
where  a  brave  and  courageous  man  would  attack  another.  I 
only  dread  him  when  he  would  go  in  disguise,  his  footstep 
noiseless.  If  it  is  blood  they  want  let  them  have  courage 
enough  to  strike  like  men." 

This  speech  made  a  wretched  impression  upon  the  country. 
Its  want  of  taste,  in  selecting  men,  who  were  honored  officials 
of  the  Government  and  respected  citizens,  and  naming  them 
personally,  to  be  jeered  at  by  a  crowd  upon  the  street,  merely 
because  he  could  not  agree  with  them  upon  political  questions, 
was  thought  to  be  an  offence  against  good  breeding  unworthy  of 
the  chief  magistrate  of  a  great  people.  To  insinuate  that  they 
were  traitors  and  associate  them  in  likeness  with  others,  who 
had  notoriously  led  in  an  effort  to  destroy  the  Nation,  to  assume 


546  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

that  his  political  opponents  were  instigating  assassination  and 
that  as  Lincoln  had  fallen  a  victim  of  a  spirit  of  hostility 
engendered  in  the  South  by  the  passions  of  the  War,  so  he  was 
in  danger  of  falling,  before  a  similar  spirit,  in  the  North,  men 
construed  as  an  unworthy  attempt  to  associate  himself  with  the 
martyr  President,  absurdly  without  foundation  in  fact. 

In  Massachusetts  where  Sumner's  career  was  regarded  with 
pride,  as  a  peculiar  possession  of  those  who  had  maintained 
him  by  their  votes,  the  President's  conduct  was  viewed  with 
pome  resentment.  The  Legislature  being  in  session,  a  resolution 
was  adopted,  by  both  Houses,  declaring  the  language  used  and 
charges  made  to  be  unbecoming  a  President,  an  unjust  reflec 
tion  upon  Massachusetts  and  without  the  shadow  of  justifica 
tion  or  defence.  A  copy  of  this  resolution,  engrossed  on  parch 
ment,  was  forwarded  to  Sumner  by  the  Governor,  with  the 
request  that  it  be  accepted  and  preserved.  The  Board  of 
Aldermen  of  the  city  of  Boston  unanimously  adopted  and  con 
veyed  a  similar  resolution  recognizing  his  great  services  and 
indignantly  repudiating  as  utterly  false  "  any  accusation  which 
likened  him  to  the  traitor  chiefs  of  the  Rebellion."  The  New 
England  Conference  of  the  M.  E.  Church,  by  resolution,  also 
communicated  to  him,  pronounced  it  "  an  unjustifiable  assault, 
upon  his  reputation,"  likened  to  that  of  Brooks,  upon  his  person. 
In  other  more  private  ways  the  same  sentiment  was  conveyed 
to  him.  Sumner  never  made  any  answer  or  allusion  to  the 
speech. 

The  speech  of  Sumner  on  the  resolution  for  the  submission 
of  the  amendment  to  the  Constitution  and  the  substitute  he 
offered,  was  followed  by  a  succession  of  speeches  on  the  same 
questions  occupying,  with  some  intermissions,  the  attention  of 
Congress  for  a  month.  Fessenden  opposed  Sumner's  substitute. 
He  was  one  of  the  ablest  men  in  the  Senate,  with  a  clear, 
sharp,  incisive  manner  of  speech,  always  directly  to  the  point 
but  sometimes  inclined,  perhaps  owing  to  ill-health,  to  undue 
severity.  He  had  seemed  severe  to  Sumner,  when  discussing  his 
speech  and  his  substitute.  During  the  debate  Sumner  spoke 
briefly  twice  more,  in  reply  to  the  others  and  especially  to  Fes 
senden. 

"  Pardon  me,  Sir,"  he  said  in  reply  to  Fessenden,  "  if  I  re 
mind  you  that  there  are  two  modes  of  debate.  One  is  to  attack 
the  previous  speaker,  with  personality  of  criticism  or  manner. 
The  other  is  to  speak  plainly  on  the  question  and  to  deal  di 
rectly,  according  to  your  convictions,  with  the  principles  in 
volved.  Sometimes  the  two  modes  are  allowed  to  intermingle. 
If  ever  there  was  occasion  when  the  first  should  be  carefully 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  5.^7 

avoided,  when  the  question  alone  should  be  handled,  and  not 
the  previous  speaker,  when  attention  should  be  directed  exclu 
sively  to  principles  involved,  and  not  to  any  subordinate  point 
of  mere  form,  it  is  now,  when  we  are  asked  to  insert  a  new 
provision  in  the  Constitution,  fixing  the  basis  of  political  power, 
at  the  expense  of  fellow-citizens  counted  by  millions.  In  this 
spirit,  I  shall  try  to  speak.  To  my  mind,  the  occasion  is 
too  solemn  for  personal  controversy,  and  I  shall  not  be  drawn 
into  it." 

He  was  not  drawn  into  it,  but  contented  himself  with  a  re 
statement  of  his  own  position  and  the  giving  of  additional 
arguments  and  authorities,  in  support  of  it. 

Before  the  close  of  the  debate,  Henderson  of  Iowa  moved  to 
strike  out  Sumner's  substitute  and  insert  in  its  stead  a  constitu 
tional  amendment  securing  suffrage  to  colored  citizens.  He 
doubted  the  power  of  Congress  to  reach  the  evil  by  a  simple 
enactment,  but  thought  the  change  better  to  be  embodied  in 
the  Constitution.  Sumner  declared  he  was  in  favor  of  his 
motion,  and  he  voted  for  it,  but  it  received  only  ten  votes. 
The  vote  was  then  taken  on  Sumner's  substitute  and  it  received 
only  eight  votes.  Other  amendments  were  proposed  and  voted 
down.  But  when  the  vote  was  finally  reached,  on  the  House 
Proposition  for  the  Constitutional  Amendment,  it  too  failed. 
This  was  a  bitter  disappointment  to  its  friends,  who  held  Sum 
ner  largely  accountable  for  it.  Stevens,  the  House  Chairman 
of  the  joint  committee,  said  :  "  It  was  slaughtered,  by  a  puerile 
and  pedantic  criticism,  by  a  perversion  of  philological  def 
inition,  which  if,  when  I  taught  school,  a  lad  who  had  studied 
Lindley  Murray  had  assumed,  I  would  have  expelled  him  from 
the  institution  as  unworthy  to  waste  education  upon.  *  *  * 
Let  us  again  try  and  see  whether  we  cannot  devise  some  way  to 
overcome  the  united  forces  of  self-righteous  Republicans  and 
unrighteous  Copperheads." 

It  was  argued,  by  Republican  Members  of  both  Houses,  that 
it  would  not  do  for  Congress  to  go  to  the  country,  after  so 
much  effort,  without  having  adopted  the  resolution.  It  was 
urged  that  Republicans  generally  were  in  favor  of  it.  It  was 
therefore  amended  and  resubmitted  and  finally  passed  both 
Houses.  It  provided  for  the  submission  to  the  States,  what  is 
now  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution.  In  this 
new  form  Sumner  voted  for  it,  but  did  not  again  debate  it.  In 
its  new  form,  it  had  no  recognition  of  exclusion  from  the  fran 
chise  on  account  of  "  race  or  color,"  so  as  to  injure  the  text  of 
the  Constitution,  which  recognized  no  race  or  color,  nor  would 
it  give  a  pretext  for  changing  the  definition  of  the  republican 


548  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

form  of  government,  which  was  required  to  be  guaranteed  to 
the  States.  It  had  a  clause  added,  denning  who  are  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  so  as  to  include  colored  persons,  assuring 
for  all  the  equal  protection  of  the  laws.  Another  clause  had 
been  added  disqualifying  all  persons  from  holding  office,  State 
or  National,  who  had  previously  taken  an  oath  of  office,  as 
Senator,  Eepresentative  or  officer  of  the  United  States  or  as 
Legislator  or  executive  or  judicial  officer  of  any  State,  to  support 
the  Constitution  and  had  afterwards  engaged  in  the  Rebellion 
unless  this  disability  was  first  removed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of 
each  House.  Still  another  clause  was  added  protecting  the  Na 
tional  debt  and  annulling  all  debts  contracted  in  aid  of  the  Re 
bellion  and  all  claims  for  the  loss  or  emancipation  of  slaves. 
All  these  provisions  not  found  in  the  original,  Sumner  believed 
counterbalanced  the  evil  he  still  saw  in  it. 

Before  the  ratification  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  by 
the  States  so  as  to  make  it  a  part  of  the  Constitution,  Sumner's 
object  was  accomplished  in  other  ways.  Congress  took  juris 
diction  of  the  elective  franchise  in  the  Confederate  States  and 
required  that  in  voting  upon  any  constitution  preparatory  to 
reconstruction  there  should  be  no  exclusion  on  account  of  race  or 
color  and  that  this  prohibition  should  also  be  embodied  in  such 
instruments.  Equal  suffrage  was  afterwards  established  by  the 
Fifteenth  Amendment  which  provided  that  the  right  of  citizens 
to  vote  should  "  not  be  denied  or  abridged  by  the  United  States 
or  by  any  State  on  account  of  race  or  color  or  previous  condi 
tion  of  servitude/'  But  these  steps  were  slowly  taken  as  will  be 
seen,  after  much  argument  and  effort,  by  the  pioneers  on  these 
questions.  Among  these  pioneers  Sumner  was  fairly  entitled 
to  be  named  first.  A  persuasion  of  the  necessity  for  extending 
the  franchise  to  the  colored  men,  owing  to  conditions  in  the 
South,  as  well  as  justice  to  them  at  last  prevailed.  Though 
the  policy  of  thus  extending  suffrage  has  been  and  is  still,  in 
certain  States,  a  much  vexed  question,  it  must  be  conceded  by 
all  that  it  was  one  of  the  great  events  of  our  political  history. 
It  has  already  added  a  chapter  of  interesting  history  to  every 
Southern  State  and  it  has  played  an  important  part  in  the  set 
tlement  of  every  National  question  since  its  adoption. 

It  has  been  seen  how  close  were  the  votes,  in  the  Senate,  on 
the  resolution  to  submit  this  Amendment.  It  required  a  two- 
thirds  vote  of  each  House.  Though  the  Republicans  had  that 
many,  the  margin  was  so  small  that  the  defection  of  a  few  was 
sufficient  to  change  the  result.  Owing  to  the  defection  of  Presi 
dent  Johnson  his  veto  would  also  defeat  any  measure  he  de 
sired,  unless  the  Republicans  could  pass  it  over  his  veto  by  a 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  549 

two-thirds  vote.  The  frequency  of  these  vetoes  had  already 
startled  the  Republicans.  Party  strength  which  had  seemed 
ample,  for  all  purposes,  when  he  was  elected,  was  now 
carefully  husbanded.  The  credentials  of  new  members  were 
closely  scanned.  The  spur  of  party  feeling  was  not  wanting. 
The  bitterness  engendered  by  the  war  had  not  abated  in  Con 
gress,  for  the  President's  course  had  served  to  augment  it 
there. 

It  was  this  situation  that  confronted  John  P.  Stockton  of 
New  Jersey,  when,  at  this  session,  he  presented  his  credentials 
to  a  seat  in  the  Senate.  The  previous  winter  had  seen  a  strug 
gle  over  his  election.  After  many  efforts  it  was  found  that  no 
one  could  secure  a  majority  of  all  the  members  elected  to  each 
House  of  the  Legislature,  as  their  rule  provided.  This  rule 
was,  therefore,  changed  by  a  resolution  at  a  joint  meeting  of  the 
two  Houses,  so  that  only  a  plurality  of  the  votes  of  the  members 
present  at  a  joint  meeting  was  required.  Under  this  rule 
Stockton  was  elected.  Thirty-eight  members  of  the  Legislature 
forwarded  to  the  Senate  a  protest  against  his  admission. 
At  the  opening  of  the  session,  he  had  appeared  and  taken  the 
oath  as  Senator.  The  validity  of  his  title  to  a  seat  was  referred 
to  the  Judiciary  Committee,  which  reported  in  his  favor.  The 
question  came  up,  in  the  Senate,  on  March  twenty-third,  1866. 
Sumner  opposed  the  adoption  of  the  report  for  two  reasons.  He 
urged  that  his  title  was  invalid  because ;  first,  a  majority  of  each 
House  was  necessary.  This  he  said  was  the  practice  in  Massa 
chusetts  and,  he  urged,  was  the  proper  practice,  although  he 
admitted  a  different  one  obtained  in  some  other  States.  Sec 
ond,  because  the  joint  meeting  of  the  two  Houses  of  the  Legis 
lature  of  New  Jersey  had  no  right,  by  resolution,  to  fix  the 
manner  of  the  choice.  It  should  be  done  by  a  law  regularly 
passed  by  the  Legislature  or  by  Congress.  He  cited  authority 
in  support  of  both  positions. 

When  the  question  came  to  a  vote  on  the  adoption  of  the 
report  of  the  committee,  the  vote  stood  twenty-one  to  twenty, 
when  Morrill  of  Maine  asked  to  have  his  name  called.  This 
was  done  and  it  resulted  in  a  tie.  Thereupon  Stockton  arose 
and  said  that  Morrill  was  paired  with  his  colleague  Wright,  who 
was  at  home  sick.  He,  therefore,  asked  his  name  to  be  called, 
which  being  done,  he  voted  for  the  adoption  of  the  report  and 
it  carried,  twenty-two  to  twenty-one.  This  action  was  taken  on 
Friday. 

On  the  following  Monday,  Sumner  moved  to  amend  the 
journal  of  Friday  by  striking  out  the  vote  of  Stockton.  He 
argued  that  no  one  could  be  a  judge  in  his  own  case,  and  to  per- 


550  LIFE  OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

mit  this  vote  to  stand  was  to  affirm  that  he  could  be.  The 
Senate  passed  a  resolution  that  the  vote  be  not  received,  and 
afterwards  voted  him  not  entitled  to  his  seat,  upon  a  recon 
sideration  of  the  question.  It  was  a  mistake  for  him  to  vote. 
If  he  had  not,  it  would  have  been  a  tie  and  he  occupying  a  seat 
would  have  been  left  in  possession  of  it.  By  voting  he  fur 
nished  a  pretext  for  opening  the  question  and  it  resulted  in  him 
being  ousted. 

Stockton,  being  a  Democrat,  if  permitted  to  retain  his 
seat,  would  doubtless  have  voted  with  his  party  to  sustain  the 
President's  vetoes.  This  would  have  prevented  the  passage  of 
some  important  legislation  of  the  session,  notably  the  Civil 
Rights  Bill,  which  had  been  vetoed  and  was  passed,  in  the  Sen 
ate  over  his  veto,  by  only  one  vote.  Sunnier  was  charged  with 
having  brought  about  his  ouster,  for  partisan  purposes.  But  the 
charge  was  hardly  fair.  To  permit  a  Senator  to  vote  on  his  own 
right  to  a  seat,  was  clearly  an  improper  precedent  to  establish 
and  Sumner  did  right  to  secure  its  correction.  Hitherto  under 
the  influence  of  the  Southern  doctrine  of  State  Rights,  the 
policy  had  been  to  enlarge  the  powers  of  the  States  and  re 
strict  those  of  the  Nation.  Hence  the  fixing  of  the  manner  of 
the  choice  of  Senators  had  been  left  to  the  States,  the  Consti 
tution  providing  that  the  State  Legislatures  might  prescribe 
the  manner,  but  that  Congress  might  alter  it.  The  attitude  to 
ward  the  doctrine  of  State  Rights  being  changed  by  the  war, 
and  being  admonished  by  the  Stockton  Case,  Congress,  at  this 
session,  assumed  jurisdiction  of  the  subject  and  fixed  by  law 
a  uniform  rule  for  making  the  choice. 

When  this  bill  was  before  the  Senate,  Sumner  opposed  and 
assisted  in  defeating  an  amendment  to  it  offered  by  Fessenden 
to  permit  each  Legislature  to  settle  whether  the  vote  should  be 
taken  viva  voce  or  by  ballot.  Sumner  insisted  that  as  the  votes 
were  given  in  a  representative  capacity,  they  should  be  cast 
openly  so  that  everyone  might  know  how  each  member  voted. 
He  favored  secret  voting  at  popular  elections,  but  open  voting 
for  the  election  of  Senators. 

Sumner  continued  the  fight  for  equal  rights  on  the  measures 
that  were  offered  at  this  session  for  the  admission  of  three 
States.  Two  of  them,  Colorado  and  Nebraska,  were  Territories 
while  the  third,  Tennessee,  had  lost  the  right  of  Statehood  by 
her  participation  in  the  Rebellion.  Sumner  insisted  that  none 
of  these  should  be  admitted  till  provision  be  made  in  its  con 
stitution  that  there  should  be  no  denial  of  the  electoral  fran 
chise  or  of  any  other  rights,  on  account  of  race  or  color,  but 
that  all  persons  should  be  equal  before  the  law.  He  argued  in 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  551 

favor  of  such  a  restriction  in  each  case,  but  Congress  was  not 
yet  ready  to  take  such  an  advanced  stand.  He  could  summon  to 
his  position  at  this  time  only  four  to  seven  votes,  in  the  Senate. 
Curiously  enough  one  of  these  was  Gratz  Brown  of  Missouri, 
who  was  soon  to  be  the  Democratic  candidate  for  Vice-Presi 
dent,  on  the  ticket  with  Greeley.  Tennessee  was  admitted  with 
out  such  a  constitutional  provision,  Sumner  voting  against  it. 
The  bill  for  Nebraska  passed  both  Houses,  but  was  vetoed  by 
the  President.  That  for  Colorado  met  the  same  fate.  At  the 
next  session,  the  bill  for  the  admission  of  Nebraska  passed  with 
the  requirement  for  equal  suffrage  in  it.  Then  the  Colorado 
bill  was  taken  up  and  this  condition  inserted  and  then  it  passed 
both  Houses,  but  was  vetoed  by  the  President;  and  it  failed  to 
pass,  over  the  veto,  for  the  want  of  the  necessary  two-thirds 
vote,  in  the  Senate.  The  few  votes  that  Sumner  was  able  to 
command  were  sufficient  to  dictate  the  insertion  of  the  pro 
vision  for  equal  rights,  in  the  contest  with  the  President. 

During  the  debate  on  Colorado,  Sumner  was  chided  with  the 
suggestion  that  its  admission  would  create  two  more  votes,  in 
the  Senate,  much  needed  by  the  Republicans.  "  Tell  me  not," 
he  retorted,  "  that  it  is  expedient  to  create  two  more  votes  in 
this  Chamber.  Nothing  can  be  expedient  that  is  not  right.  If 
I  were  now  about  to  pronounce  the  last  words  that  I  could  ever 
utter  in  this  Cbamber,  I  would  say  to  you,  Senators,  do  not  for 
get  that  right  is  always  the  highest  expediency.  You  can  never 
sacrifice  the  right  without  suffering  for  it." 

Among  those  who  thus  far  had  opposed  Sumner's  efforts  for 
political  equality  for  the  black  race  and  had  inclined  toward 
the  President  was  Cowan  of  Pennsylvania.  He,  was  elected  as 
a  Republican.  The  next  elections  went  strongly  against  the 
President.  After  they  were  over  and  the  debate  on  the  admis 
sion  of  Nebraska  came  up,  in  the  next  session,  Cowan  voted 
with  Sumner.  His  conversion  came  somewhat  awkwardly  to 
him  and  he  was  disposed  to  treat  the  question  humorously.  In 
the  Senate  one  day,  he  said : 

"  My  honorable  friend,  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  is 
six  feet  three  inches  in  height,  and  weighs  two  hundred  and 
twenty  pounds ;  I  am  six  feet  three  inches  in  height  and  weigh 
one  hundred  and  ninety  pounds,  if  you  please.  That  is  not 
equality.  My  honorable  friend  from  Maine  here  is  five  feet 
nine  inches. 

Fessenden.    "  And  a  half."     (Laughter.) 

Cowan.  "  I  beg  the  honorable  Senator's  pardon.  I  would  not 
rliminish  his  stature  an  inch  or  half  an  inch,  nor  take  a  hair 
from  his  head;  and  he  weighs  one  hundred  and  forty  pounds, 


552  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNElt 

if  you  please.  Is  that  equality  ?  The  honorable  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  is  largely  learned ;  there  is  nothing,  I  think,  that 
he  does  not  know,  that  is  worth  knowing, — and  this  is  no  empty 
compliment  that  I  desire  to  pay  him  now;  and  he  is  so  much 
wiser  than  I  am,  that  at  the  last  elections  he  divined  exactly 
how  they  would  result,  and  I  did  not.  (Laughter.)  He  rode 
triumphantly  upon  the  popular  wave ;  and  I  was  overwhelmed, 
and  came  out  with  eyes  and  nose  suffused,  and  hardly  able  to 


Sumner.    "  You  ought  to  have  followed  my  advice." 

Cowan.  "  Why  should  I  not  ?  What  was  Providence  doing 
in  that?  If  Providence  had  made  me  equal  to  the  honorable 
Senator  I  should  not  have  needed  his  counsel,  and  I  should  have 
ridden,  too,  on  the  topmost  wave." 

Sumner's  position  among  his  fellow-Senators  was  now  a  com 
manding  one.  His  counsel  was  sought  and  respected.  He  was 
never  a  strict  party  man,  but  he  knew  the  value  of  organization. 
He  knew  that  little  good  could  be  accomplished,  in  public  life, 
without  it.  But  he  placed  principle  above  party  and  preferred 
his  own  convictions  of  duty  to  the  opinion  of  the  caucus;  had 
great  faith  in  discussion  and  so  he  would  discuss  and  agitate 
and  argue,  till  he  would  convert  others  to  his  own  position. 
How  often  during  his  career  he  appeared  in  defence  of  a  princi 
ple  with  only  three  or  four  supporters  and  kept  on  gathering 
support  until  he  triumphed,  is  now  a  cause  for  remark. 
Through  it  all  he  preserved  the  respect  and  confidence  of  his 
associates.  Sometimes  they  were  impatient  at  his  persistence  in 
pushing  his  own  measures  to  the  front  and  insisting  on  action 
upon  them  to  the  exclusion  of  other  business,  that  they  wished 
to  forward.  Sometimes  his  disposition  to  argue  wearied  them. 
Eut  they  all  admitted  his  high  character,  his  wonderful  learn 
ing  and  his  great  industry,  his  firm  hope  to  make  his  career  in 
the  Senate  a  useful  one.  With  those  who  served  longest  with 
him,  this  feeling  was  most  marked.  A  strong  tie  grew  up  be 
tween  them,  that  either  saw  broken  with  sorrow. 

During  the  present  session,  he  was  called  upon  three  times 
to  commemorate  friends  with  whom  he  sadly  parted.  Henry 
Winter  Davis,  after  a  brilliant  career  of  eight  years  in  the 
House  had  died  on  December  30,  1865,  and  Senators  Collamer 
and  Foot,  both  from  Vermont,  had  died,  one  earlier,  and  one 
later  than  Davis.  All  three  were  prominent  in  the  questions 
that  grew  out  of  the  War.  It  was  therefore  with  sadness  that 
he  saw  them  laid  away.  He  commemorated  all  three,  Davis 
by  an  article  published  in  the  New  York  Independent  and  the 
others  by  appreciative  tributes  in  the  Senate. 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  553 

Of  Collamer  he  feelingly  said :  "  Since  Henry  Clay  left  this 
Chamber  by  the  gate  of  death,  no  Senator  has  passed  that  way 
crowned  with  the  same  honorable  years  as  Mr.  Collamer;  nor 
has  any  Senator  passed  that  way  whose  departure  created  such 
a  blank  in  the  public  counsels,  unless  we  except  Mr.  Douglas." 
He  reviewed  his  career  in  the  Senate,  pausing  to  emphasize  two 
occasions  when  his  fearless  independence  had  shown  forth  with 
marked  effect.  One  already  mentioned  in  these  pages,  was  in 
opposing  the  majority  report  of  the  Committee  on  Territories 
to  which  the  whitewashing  message  of  President  Buchanan 
on  the  Kansas  troubles  had  been  referred.  The  other  was  when 
Collamer,  with  equal  or  greater  courage,  opposed  the  President 
of  his  own  party,  then  the  triumphant  chieftain  of  the  North, 
in  his  unwarranted  exercise  of  power  in  the  institution  of  civil 
governments  for  the  unreconstructed  States,  "  to  last  beyond 
the  war  ".  In  the  one  case  he  opposed  executive  power  insti 
gated  by  Jefferson  Davis  and  in  the  other  when  wielded  "  by  the 
gentle  hand  of  Abraham  Lincoln."  But  in  both  cases  it  was 
the  firm  hand  of  the  conscientious  Senator  opposing  the  un 
warranted  exercise  of  power  by  the  President  and  presenting 
an  inspiring  example  to  others  in  good  works. 

Foote  was  the  oldest  Senator  in  continuous  service.  He  had 
entered  in  the  spring  before  Sumner.  Sumner's  service 
commenced  with  the  opening  of  the  session  in  December.  Only 
one  other,  Wade,  now  remained  of  equal  length  of  service  with 
Sumner.  Yet  Sumner  was  destined  to  remain  for  almost  nine 
years  more,  five  years  after  Wade.  Foote  was  a  retiring  man, 
slow  to  express  opinions,  but  firm  in  his  conduct  and  like  his 
colleague  Collamer,  of  unquestioned  courage.  Giddings  had  at 
the  beginning  assured  Sumner  that  he  could  be  depended  on,  in 
the  struggle  against  slavery,  and  had  pleasantly  recalled  how 
on  Foote's  first  visit  to  the  House,  after  he  took  his  seat  in  the 
Senate,  he  had  seemed  indifferent  to  criticism  by  asserting  his 
friendship  for  Giddings,  the  anti-slavery  leader,  in  the  days 
when  slavery  tyrannized  public  life.  He  was  thus  firm  in  his 
convictions,  yet  he  was  so  forgetful  of  self  that  he  would  will 
ingly  waive  a  right  of  his  own,  in  the  appointments  to  com 
mittees,  so  as  to  give  important  places,  assigned  to  himself,  to 
others  who  desired  them.  "  There  was  no  jealousy,  envy  or  un- 
charitableness  in  him,"  said  Sumner.  "  He  enjoyed  what  others 
did,  and  praised  generously.  He  knew  that  his  own  just  posi 
tion  could  not  be  disturbed  by  the  success  of  another.  What 
ever  another  may  be,  whether  more  or  less,  a  man  must  always 
be  himself.  A  true  man  is  a  positive,  and  not  a  relative  quan 
tity.  Properly  inspired,  he  will  know  that  in  a  just  sense,  no- 


554          LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER. 

body  can  stand  in  the  way  of  another."  Foote  had  shown  talent 
as  a  presiding  officer,  which  was  recognized  by  the  Senate  in 
making  him  for  a  considerable  time  its  President  pro  tern.  His 
firmness  and  fairness  fitted  him  for  such  duties.  He  had  little 
taste  for  controversy,  seldom  spoke  in  the  Senate,  but  for  the 
less  brilliant  though  not  less  useful  work  of  a  Senator  he  was 
pre-eminent. 

During  this  session  Sumner  made  some  short  speeches  in 
favor  of  non-partisan  measures,  which,  after  years  of  discus 
sion,  have  reached  realization.  They  show  his  wisdom  as  a 
statesman.  Among  these  may  be  named  his  speech  for  the 
survey  of  a  ship-canal  across  the  isthmus  of  Panama,  one  for 
the  metric  system  of  weights  and  measures,  another  for  the 
power  of  Congress  to  provide  against  cholera  from  abroad,  still 
another  for  its  power  to  provide  against  a  cattle  plague.  He 
also  wrote  in  favor  of  an  international  copyright  for  authors. 
All  of  these  show  him  far  in  advance  of  the  sentiment  of  that 
time. 

His  effort  for  a  codification  of  the  United  States  statutes 
which  he  commenced  with  his  first  session  in  the  Senate  and 
had  renewed  repeatedly  since,  was  successful  at  this  session. 
The  bill  was  passed  and  Caleb  Gushing,  of  Massachusetts,  was 
one  of  the  Commissioners  appointed. 

The  hard  work  of  this  session  told  seriously  on  Sumner's 
health.  The  session  lasted  till  about  August  first  and  his  labor 
had  been  excessive.  There  were  reappearances  of  his  nervous 
troubles  which  had  resulted  from  the  Brooks  assault.  He  was 
obliged  to  consult  his  former  physician,  Dr.  Brown-Sequard, 
then  in  America.  Later  he  made  a  brief  excursion  to  the  White 
Mountains. 


CHAPTEE   XXXIII 

THE  DEATH  OF  HIS  MOTHER — HER  CHARACTER — HIS  MARRIAGE 

ON  the  fifteenth  day  of  June,  1866,  Sumner  met  the  loss  by 
death  of  his  mother.  She  was  eighty-one  years  of  age.  He  had 
never  married  and  of  her  nine  children  he  was  the  only  one 
who  continued  his  home  with  her.  All  the  others  were  dead, 
save  the  youngest,  Julia,  who  had  married  Dr.  John  Hastings, 
of  San  Francisco,  California,  in  1854.  During  the  last  years 
of  her  life  Mrs.  Hastings  suffered  from  ill-health  and  though 
she  survived  her  brother,  dying  in  1876,  she  did  not  visit  the 
Atlantic  States  after  1862.  '  Her  three  daughters  were  the  only 
living  grandchildren.  So  that  he  was  left  alone  to  comfort  his 
mother's  declining  years.  During  his  absence  in  Washington, 
she  continued  at  their  home  in  Boston,  with  a  companion ;  but 
when  not  occupied  with  his  duties  in  the  Senate,  he  usually 
spent  his  time  there  with  her. 

It  was  the  same  old  home,  No.  20,  Hancock  Street,  that 
Sheriff  Sumner  had  bought  thirty-six  years  before,  after  the 
improvement  of  his  fortunes  by  his  office,  and  to  which  he  then 
removed  his  family.  During  1867,  a  little  more  than  a  year 
after  the  mother's  death  it  was  sold  out  of  the  family.  It 
was  well  located  in  one  of  the  higher  and  better  parts  of  Boston, 
not  far  from  the  State  House.  No  effort  had  been  made  to 
change  it  to  correspond  to  a  larger  life.  It  continued  the  same 
comfortable  and  substantial  home,  that  had  sheltered  him  in 
his  boyhood.  There  peace  and  happiness,  the  usual  accompani 
ments  of  good  sense  and  good  habits,  prevailed.  From  day  to 
day  through  the  long  twenty-seven  years  of  her  widowhood,  the 
spirit  of  contentment  her  life  cast  about  it  never  changed.  It 
was  just,  as  we  think,  such  a  retreat  from  the  turmoil  of  his 
stormy  career  as  he  needed.  There  he  could  always  find  quiet, 
grateful  rest.  And  while  she  lived  he  never  sought,  and  when 
she  died  he  never  found,  another  like  it.  There  too  she  grew 
gracefully  older  and  as  the  weight  of  years  fell  gently  upon  her, 
she  came  to  lean  more  heavily  upon  the  stronger  arm  of  her 
son. 

She  was  an  ideal  mother,  a  woman  of  strong  common  sense 
with  a  sweet  disposition ;  these  were  her  prevailing  traits.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  her  ancestors  had  been  farmers,  well- 

555 


556  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to-do  and  marked  by  good  sense  and  good  habits,  leading  plain 
lives,  close  to  nature  and  apart  from  the  conventionalities  of 
crowded  cities;  that  her  father  had  died  when  she  was  only 
fourteen  years  of  age,  leaving  her  and  one  sister  in  the  care  of 
a  widowed  mother,  where  she  was  taught  habits  of  economy 
and  industry  and  gained  some  training  in  the  elementary 
branches  taught  in  a  public  school.  She  was  married  while 
earning  her  living,  with  her  needle,  in  Boston  and  though  her 
husband  was  then  poor  she  was  able  to  raise  their  family  with 
comfort  and  keep  within  his  income;  and  though  his  income 
was  afterwards  increased  by  his  office,  it  was  not  wasted  but, 
largely  owing  to  her,  he  left  in  her  hands  an  estate  worth  about 
fifty  thousand  dollars,  for  her  during  life  and  then  to  distribute 
to  their  children.  This  trust,  she  executed  so  faithfully  that 
when  she  died  the  property  had  accumulated  to  the  value  of 
more  than  a  hundred  thousand  dollars  and  was  then  equally 
divided  between  their  surviving  children. 

The  same  sensible  conduct,  as  in  the  use  of  her  husband's 
property,  was  observable  in  the  treatment  of  their  children. 
The  care  of  them  she  assumed  herself,  never  when  she  could  do 
otherwise,  entrusting  it  to  others.  Three  of  her  daughters  died, 
in  early  womanhood,  after  a  lingering  illness  and  her  husband 
had  likewise  died  after  months  of  confinement.  It  will  be 
remembered  that  Charles  had  suffered  from  a  long  sickness  in 
early  manhood,  when  his  life  was  despaired  of  for  some  weeks. 
Yet  she  was  the  constant  nurse  of  them  all,  day  and  night. 
She  assumed  and  retained  to  the  end  the  management  of  her 
own  house.  As  she  grew  older  her  thoughts  centered  with 
pardonable  pride  in  her  son.  Her  thoughts  went  out  to  him 
when  he  was  absent,  watching  his  public  career  and  looking 
forward  eagerly  to  his  coming  home.  It  so  happened  that  the 
last  letter  he  wrote  her  was  during  this  session  of  Congress  in 
answer  to  an  inquiry  prompted  by  her,  for  his  health,  which 
she  had  heard  was  not  good.  His  answer  full  of  tenderness, 
and  expressing  solicitude  for  her  comfort,  quieted  her  fears  by 
assuring  her  that  his  sickness  was  not  serious,  but  only  a  slight 
indisposition,  caused  by  overwork. 

She  was  tall  and  spare  in  build.  All  her  life  long  she  had 
enjoyed  good  health  and,  when  she  died,  it  was  of  no  particular 
disease  but  only  from  a  general  failure ;  she  was  worn  out  with 
age.  It  had  been  apparent  for  some  months  that  she  could  not 
last  long;  so  by  an  arrangement  with  her  physician,  he  wrote 
weekly  letters  to  the  son,  to  keep  him  informed  of  her  condi 
tion.  He  was  summoned  at  last  by  telegraph  and  reached  her 
bed  several  days  before  her  death  and  remained  with  her  to  the 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  557 

end,  the  only  one  of  her  once  large  family  present  to  pay  this 
debt.  It  was  the  close  of  a  life  of  noble  Christian  womanhood 
and  the  end  came  peacefully,  as  to  one  whose  work  was  well 
done  and  for  whom  "  joy  cometh  in  the  morning." 

He  had  been  a  devoted  son.  The  father,  somewhat  stern  in 
his  manner,  had  turned  the  child's  affections  to  the  mother. 
She  was  kindly,  sympathetic  and  sweet;  and  the  tendrils  of  his 
young  heart  had  gathered  in  affection  about  her,  never  to  be 
unfolded  again.  Though  the  father  had  marked  out  his  career, 
directed  his  studies  and  controlled  his  habits;  she  had  en 
couraged  his  childish  efforts,  softened  the  hard  places  and 
sweetened  the  cup  of  his  early  life.  Her  good  sense  never  for 
sook  her  and  it  was  a  never  failing  source  of  comfort  to  him. 
Even  in  mature  years,  though  by  training  he  had  grown  in  other 
directions  than  hers,  he  found  her  cool  head  and  good  judgment 
a  safe  counsellor.  And  he  repaid  the  debt.  Her  comfort  was 
always  a  consideration  with  him.  When  at  home  he  conformed 
to  her  habits  and  simple  way  of  living,  assisted  her  in  the 
management  of  the  father's  estate,  and  maintained  the  peaceful 
tenor  of  her  life.  By  continuing  his  home  with  her,  she  was 
spared  the  feeling  that  she  was  old  and  of  no  use,  but  only  an  in- 
cumbrance  to  others, — a  feeling  that  often  fosters  the  wish  to 
be  away  and  at  rest.  While  she  lived,  he  never  felt  that  he  was 
free  to  contract  another  relation  and  this  feeling  was  so  strong 
that  had  she  survived  he  probably  never  would  have  married. 

After  her  death  he  felt  for  the  first  time  that  he  had  the 
means  and  was  at  liberty  to  get  married.  He  had  been  meeting 
for  some  time  in  Washington,  at  the  home  of  Samuel  Hooper, 
a  Member  of  Congress  from  Boston,  the  widow  of  his  son.  She 
was  formerly  Miss  Alice  Mason,  of  Boston,  a  niece  of  Jeremiah 
Mason,  Daniel  Webster's  old  competitor  at  the  bar.  She  was 
a  beautiful  and  attractive  young  woman,  of  slender  and  stately 
form,  highbred  manner  and  aristocratic  reserve,  one  of  the 
noticeably  fascinating  Women  in  Washington  society;  but 
somewhat  spoiled  by  the  homage  she  had  received,  had  an  ex 
tremely-  variable  disposition  which  she  could  show  in  teasing  or 
in  temper,  and  she  was  fond  of  society  and  was  ambitious,  with 
the  disposition  to  rule  the  circle  in  which  she  moved.  She  was 
the  mother  of  one  child,  a  daughter  of  eight  years.  For 
some  time  Sumner  had  been  attracted  to  her.  In  the  Sep 
tember  following  the  death  of  his  mother,  their  engagement  was 
announced.  She  was  then  but  twenty-eight  years  of  age ;  while 
he  was  fifty-five.  The  announcement  was  the  occasion  of  nu 
merous  congratulatory  letters  from  his  friends,  Bancroft,  Whit- 
tier,  Longfellow,  Howe,  Lieber,  the  Duchess  of  Sutherland, 


558  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  8UMNER. 

the  Argylls,  Robert  Ingham,  from  Chief -Justice  Chase,  Hamil 
ton  Fish,  Mrs.  Lincoln  and  others,  who  were  rejoiced  to  learn 
of  the  contemplated  change  in  his  life.  They  had  known  him 
so  long  and  seen  him  so  much,  in  a  social  way,  that  they  could 
not  view  the  marriage  otherwise  than  as  fraught  with  happiness 
to  both. 

The  void  created  by  the  death  of  his  mother,  which  he  felt 
during  the  following  recess  of  Congress  when  the  door  of  his 
old  home  in  Boston  was  no  longer  open,  had  easily  carried  his 
thoughts  forward  to  such  a  new  life.  Her  presence  in  Wash 
ington  presiding  with  noticeable  grace  in  one  of  the  homes, 
where  he  was  always  welcome, — welcome  even  after  the 
break  came  and  his  married  life  had  ended — easily  lent  en 
chantment  to  the  proposed  change.  At  the  home  of  the  Rep 
resentative  from  Boston,  the  Senator  was  naturally  present 
often  and  saw  much  of  her.  They  were  at  Washington  during 
the  sessions  and  when  Congress  adjourned  they  were  at  Boston 
together.  They  met  at  a  home  of  affluence  and  culture  where  a 
graceful  hospitality  was  dispensed.  It  conformed  to  his  taste, 
and  when  contemplating  the  establishment  of  a  home  of  his 
own  he  naturally  wished  it  to  be  one  like  this. 

Yet  the  hope  had  not  been,  in  its  happiest  anticipation,  with 
out  solicitude.  Less  than  a  month  before  his  marriage,  he 
wrote  Bancroft :  "  I  tremble  sometimes  at  the  responsibility  I 
assume.  I  am  to  make  another  happy;  for  unless  I  do  this, 
there  can  be  no  happiness  for  me  and  my  idea  will  be  quenched 
in  darkness.  But  the  good  God  that  gave  me  this  new  life  will, 
I  trust,  protect  it.  If  you  knew  how  little  of  design  or  will 
there  was  in  what  has  occurred,  you  would  see  the  Providence 
which  has  ruled." 

On  the  seventeenth  day  of  October.,  1866,  they  were  married. 
The  intervening  weeks  before  the  opening  of  Congress,  they 
spent  at  Newport  and  at  his  old  home  at  Boston.  At  the  open 
ing  of  the  session  in  December,  they  took  a  house  in  Washing 
ton,  bought  a  team,  rented  a  pew  in  church  and  settled  down 
to  housekeeping  there.  His  health  was  now  fully  restored 
and  he  was  rejoicing  in  the  bright  anticipation  of  happiness 
in  this  new  relation.  He  felt  the  inspiration  of  the  high  place 
he  held  in  public  life  and  though  accompanied  with  added 
labor  he  turned  to  the  work  of  the  session  with  renewed  ardor. 


CHAPTER  XXXIV 

PARKER    FRATERNITY    LECTURE PRESIDENT    JOHNSON    AGAINST 

XIV  AMENDMENT ELECTION   OF   1866 TENURE  OF  OFFICE 

BILL RECONSTRUCTION EQUAL   SUFFRAGE PURCHASE   OF 

ALASKA 

DURING  this  recess  of  Congress,  on  October  second,  1866, 
Surnner  delivered  the  opening  lecture  of  the  annual  series  of 
the  Parker  Fraternity,  at  Music  Hall,  Boston.  His  theme  was, 
The  One  Man  Power  against  Congress.  It  was  a  review  of  the 
policy  and  administration  of  President  Johnson,  up  to  that 
time,  and  recounted  the  interviews  Sumner  had  with  him, 
after  the  death  of  President  Lincoln.  Sumner  had  now 
assumed  an  attitude  of  pronounced  opposition.  He  was  per 
suaded,  and  he  did  not  hesitate  to  say  that  President  Johnson 
was  a  Southerner,  the  successor  in  his  sympathies  and  purposes 
to  Jefferson  Davis,  and  that  his  influence  should  be  counter 
acted  by  all  loyal  citizens  and  good  men.  He  declared  that  the 
war  had  been  fought  at  the  expense  of  much  blood  and  treasure 
and  that  the  North  had  been  victorious  in  the  field,  but  that  all 
the  results  of  the  war  were  being  frittered  away  by  the  stubborn 
and  perverse  policy  pursued  by  the  President,  that  instead  of 
building  up  governments  in  the  Confederate  States  and  recon 
structing  the  National  authority,  from  the  sound  materials,  the 
Union  men  and  the  loyal  citizens,  he  was  using  only  that  which 
was  worn  out,  decayed  and  rotten,  the  Confederates  who  had 
been  torn  from  their  places  of  power  by  the  war.  Sumner  in 
sisted  that  the  very  reverse  of  this  should  be  the  policy,  that  the 
men  who  had  fomented  rebellion  should  all  be  excluded  and  new 
men  of  tried  loyalty  be  entrusted  with  power. 

He  argued  that  in  acting  upon  the  question  of  Reconstruc 
tion  the  President  was  usurping  the  power  of  Congress,  that  the 
Executive  had  no  authority  to  decide  questions  of  this  kind, 
that  the  Rebel  States  by  the  Ordinances  of  Secession  and  the 
support  of  rebellion  had  forfeited  all  rights  of  statehood  and 
reduced  themselves  to  the  condition  of  Territories  and  that  it 
was  for  Congress  to  determine  by  law  upon  what  condition 
they  were  to  be  admitted  as  States.  Jurisdiction  of  this  im 
portant  subject,  much  to  his  regret,  Congress  had  been  slow  in 
assuming.  It  involved,  in  large  measure,  the  benefits  that  were 

559 


560  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to  be  reaped  from  the  war.  If  those  who  had  constituted  the 
Confederate  armies  and  government,  were  to  assume  control, 
the  same  old  troubles  that  had  led  to  the  war  might  be  expected 
to  reappear.  If  the  freedmen  were  given  the  ballot,  they  would 
unite  with  the  loyal  whites  of  the  South  and  outnumber  and 
outvote,  and  thus  be  able  to  control,  the  rebellious  elements.  He 
would  therefore  make  the  ballot  to  the  freedmen  an  essential 
condition  of  Reconstruction. 

The  President  was  unalterably  opposed  to  extending  the  ballot 
to  colored  men.  He  had  boldly  and  repeatedly  predicted  that 
such  a  concession  would  lead  to  a  war  between  the  races,  with 
the  possible  extinction  of  the  weaker.  Therefore  he  was  as 
suming  jurisdiction  of  the  whole  subject  of  reconstruction  and 
was  pressing  forward  to  determine  every  question  involved. 
He  assumed  that  though  they  had  rebelled  and  passed  ordi 
nances  of  secession,  that  the  Confederate  States  had  been  con 
quered  and  that  thereby  their  ordinances  of  secession  had  been 
annulled  and  that  they  still  held  their  place  and  were  entitled 
to  be  treated  as  sister  States  just  as  if  they  had  never  attempted 
secession.  Thus  the  line  was  sharply  drawn  between  Congress 
and  the  President.  Congress  was  assuming  control  of  the 
matter  as  one  for  legislative  determination,  with  the  purpose  of 
equal  suffrage  in  view ;  the  President  was  assuming  the  question 
as  settled  and  all  that  remained,  was  for  the  Executive  to  see 
the  laws  in  force  executed  and  oppose  any  change  in  the  ballot, 
treating  that  within  their  limits  as  a  matter  for  the  considera 
tion  of  the  Confederate  States  alone.  The  situation  was,  Sum- 
ner  insisted,  that  of  "  one  man  power  against  Congress." 

There  were  many  persons  who  doubted  the  propriety  of 
elevating  to  the  franchise,  freedmen,  who  had  so  lately  been 
slaves  and  who  were  without  education  or  experience  to  fit  them 
for  the  duties  of  citizenship.  Sumner  felt  the  force  of  the  sug 
gestion.  But  he  answered  that  their  loyalty  with  ignorance  was 
better  than  the  education  without  loyalty,  of  the  other  class. 
He  complained  bitterly  of  the  use  of  the  pardoning  power  by 
the  President  to  restore  Confederates  to  places  of  power.  He 
insisted  that  they  should  only  be  pardoned  on  condition  that 
they  give  up  a  part  of  their  large  estates,  so  as  to  furnish  home 
steads  to  the  freedmen,  who  when  in  slavery  had  helped  to  pile 
them  up  by  their  unrequited  toil.  The  freedmen  he  urged 
were  eager  for  such  homes.  These  with  education  would  place 
them  in  condition  to  care  for  themselves  and  do  good  for  the 
country. 

The  perversity  of  the  President's  course  was  shown  during 
this  summer.  Congress  had  submitted  the  Fourteenth  Amend- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  561 

ment  to  the  Constitution.  It  would  not  become  a  part  of  the 
Constitution  until  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  States.  Test 
imony  was  abundant,  from  those  who  had  been  in  the  South  at 
the  close  of  the  war,  that  the  spirit  of  her  people  had  been 
broken  and  she  was  ready  to  perform  all  proper  conditions  laid 
upon  her  by  the  North  to  restore  her  States  to  their  former 
place.  It  was  believed  that  under  such  a  firm  and  just  hand  as 
Lincoln's,  there  would  have  been  no  trouble  and  that  restoration 
of  good  feeling  under  proper  conditions  for  the  freedmen, 
would  have  been  easy.  But  President  Johnson,  by  the  perverse 
tone  of  his  message  and  speeches,  referring  to  the  Southern  as 
an  oppressed  people  and  the  ruling  party  of  the  North  as  bent 
on  humiliating  them  and  preventing  a  peaceful  union  of  the 
rival  sections,  had  encouraged  a  spirit  of  defiance  in  the  South 
and  instead  of  submitting  gracefully  to  reasonable  conditions, 
she  now  wished  to  dictate  herself  what  those  conditions  should 
be.  It  was  now  apparent  that  the  President  was  attempting  to 
defeat  the  ratification  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  He  was 
in  communication  privately,  with  those  who  controlled  the  polit 
ical  action  of  the  insurrectionary  States  and  he  was  discour 
aging  them  from  voting  for  it.  He  was  not  willing  his 
opponents  in  the  North  should  have  such  a  gratification. 

The  result  showed  how  successful  he  was.  Every  one  of  these 
States  rejected  it.  The  Legislatures  of  Florida,  Mississippi  and 
Louisiana,  all  rejected  it  unanimously.  Virginia  and  South 
Carolina  each  gave  it  one  vote ;  Georgia,  two ;  Arkansas,  three ; 
Texas,  five;  Alabama,  ten;  and  North  Carolina,  eleven.  It 
has  since  been  shown  conclusively  that  when  one  of  these  States 
proposed  to  reconsider  its  vote  of  rejection  and  those  in  control 
asked  his  advice,  it  was  given  against  it  and  the  reconsideration 
was  not  taken. 

The  provisions  of  this  Amendment  were  so  eminently  just 
that  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  he  could  so  control  these  States. 
If  colored  citizens  were  not  allowed  to  vote,  why  should  they 
be  allowed  by  their  numbers  to  increase  the  representation  in 
Congress  of  the  South,  so  that  one  vote  in  South  Carolina  could 
neutralize  two  votes  in  Massachusetts?  Why  should  the  pay 
ment  of  the  National  debt  contracted  in  a  war  to  preserve  the 
Union  not  be  guaranteed  by  that  restored  Union  ?  Why  should 
the  debt  of  the  Confederate  Government  contracted  in  a  war 
to  destroy  that  Union  not  be  annulled  ?  Who  was  left  to  pay 
it?  The  Confederacy,  that  contracted  it,  was  no  more.  Why 
should  not  all  claims  for  slaves  emancipated  as  a  necessary  war 
measure  to  weaken  the  Confederacy,  likewise  be  annulled  ? 
Could  claims  for  railroads  and  bridges  and  stores  destroyed  by 


562  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  invading  armies  of  the  North  be  paid?  Why  should  not 
citizenship  be  defined  so  that  it  could  be  authoritatively  settled 
by  the  Constitution  who  are  citizens  of  the  United  States  ?  Yet 
these  were  the  essential  features  of  the  Amendment  the  South 
so  flippantly  rejected. 

Sumner  argued  that  the  conduct  of  the  President  in  procur 
ing  the  rejection  of  such  an  Amendment  richly  deserved  the 
criticism  of  good  citizens.  His  lecture  was  delivered  during 
the  campaign  of  1866  and  its  purpose  was  to  aid  the  opposition 
to  the  President's  policy  at  the  popular  election  and  secure  an 
indorsement  for  that  of  Congress.  The  campaign  was  one  of 
peculiar  activity,  never  perhaps  equalled,  except  in  a  Presiden 
tial  year.  Four  national  conventions  were  held ;  two  in  Phila 
delphia,  one  of  the  President's  friends  and  one  of  his  opponents, 
one  of  the  soldiers  friendly  to  him,  in  Cleveland ;  and  one  of 
the  soldiers  against  him,  at  Pittsburg.  The  last  was  the  great 
est  and  most  interesting  of  them  all.  The  President,  eager  to 
secure  an  indorsement,  made  a  journey  to  Chicago,  ostensibly 
to  be  present  at  the  laying  of  the  cornerstone  of  the  monument 
of  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  but  in  reality  to  make  an  electioneering 
tour,  going  by  way  of  Baltimore,  Philadelphia,  New  York,  Al 
bany  and  thence  westward  by  way  of  Cleveland  to  Chicago, 
returning  by  way  of  St.  Louie,  and  speaking  at  many  places 
along  the  route.  This  journey  has  ever  since  been  popularly 
known  as  his  "  swinging  around  the  circle."  His  speeches  were 
marked  by  his  usual  want  of  taste  on  such  occasions,  coarse  an 
swers  to  rude  remarks  made  by  his  auditors  and  violent  abuse 
of  Congress,  all  much  to  his  own  detriment.  Petroleum  V. 
Nasby,  humorously  pretending  to  support  the  President,  de 
scribed  the  tour,  as  undertaken  to  "  arouse  the  people  to  the 
danger  of  concentrating  power  in  the  hands  of  Congress,  in 
stead  of  diffusing  it  through  one  man." 

The  result  of  the  election  was  overwhelmingly  against  the 
President.  A  Congress  was  elected,  three  to  one  against  him. 
The  ratification  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  had  in  many 
quarters  till  now,  notably  in  the  New  York  Republican  Plat 
form,  been  made  the  test  of  the  fitness  of  a  Confederate  State 
to  be  restored  to  its  place.  But  the  election  developed  among 
the  people  a  very  strong  sentiment  in  favor  of  the  enfranchise 
ment  of  the  freedmen,  as  the  only  safe  condition.  Riots  had 
occurred  at  New  Orleans,  Memphis  and  other  places  in  the 
South,  which  were  attributed  to  Johnson's  influence.  The  peo 
ple  of  the  North  concluded,  as  had  Sumner  before  them,  that 
the  colored  votes  were  needed  in  the  South  to  counteract  the 
Confederate  influence. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  563 

Congress  meeting  soon  after  the  elections,  the  two  parties,  to 
the  contest  before  the  people,  met  in  no  uncertain  mood.  Con 
gress  encouraged  by  its  success  was  ready  to  press  forward  in 
the  work  it  had  begun;  the  President  with  the  self-centered, 
pugnacious  sternness  of  his  nature,  angered  by  the  election,  was 
defiant  and  if  possible  more  determined  than  ever.  Neither 
side  was  in  the  humor  for  compromise.  The  session  was  largely 
occupied  in  devising  and  passing  over  his  veto  measures  to 
limit  his  power. 

The  President,  though  not  disposed  at  first  to  make  removals 
from  office,  had  now  adopted  a  different  policy,  and  removals, 
of  those  who  were  recognized  as  his  opponents,  were  being  made 
with  alarming  frequency.  A  clerk  in  the  Treasury  Department, 
who  asked  leave  of  absence  to  attend  the  convention  of  soldiers 
held  at  Pittsburg,  had  been  refused.  He  resigned  his  position 
and  went  and  was  made  Temporary  Chairman  of  the  conven 
tion.  At  St.  Louis  when  "  swinging  around  the  circle  "  John 
son  declared,  in  words  that  afford  a  fair  sample  of  his  diction 
on  this  memorable  trip,  "I  believe  that  one  set  of  men  have 
enjoyed  the  emoluments  of  office  long  enough,  and  they  should 
let  another  portion  of  the  people  have  a  chance.  (Cheers.) 
How  are  these  men  to  be  got  out  (A  voice,  'Kick  'em  out! ' — 
cheers  and  laughter},,  unless  your  Executive  can  put  them  out, 
— unless  you  can  reach  them  through  the  President  ?  Congress 
says  he  shall  not  turn  them  out,  and  they  are  trying  to  pass 
laws  to  prevent  it  being  done.  Well  let  me  say  to  you,  if  you 
will  stand  by  me  in  this  action  (cheers), — if  you  will  stand  by 
me  in  trying  to  give  the  people  a  fair  chance, — to  have  soldiers 
and  citizens  to  participate  in  these  offices, — God  being  willing,  I 
will  kick  them  out, — I  will  kick  them  out  just  as  fast  as  I 
can."  (Great  cheering.) 

This  frank  statement  of  his  purpose,  which  men  saw  every 
day  being  carried  out,  startled  Federal  officeholders  and  their 
friends.  On  the  day  Congress  opened,  a  bill  was  introduced  to 
restrain  this  threatened  wholesale  dismissal.  The  measure  was 
known  as  the  Tenure  of  Office  Bill.  As  passed,  it  provided  that 
every  person  holding  a  civil  office  to  which  he  had  been  ap 
pointed,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  should  be 
entitled  to  hold  the  office  until  his  successor  would,  in  like  man 
ner,  be  appointed  and  qualified,  excepting,  however,  that  mem 
bers  of  the  Cabinet  should  hold  their  offices  during  the  term  of 
the  President  by  whom  they  were  appointed  and  for  one  month 
'  thereafter.  The  President  might  suspend  an  officer  for  cause 
during  a  recess  of  the  Senate,  but  if  the  Senate  at  its  next  ses 
sion  refused  to  concur  in  the  suspension  then,  he  was  to  be  rein- 


564  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

stated.  Any  officer  making  the  appointment  and  any  person  ac 
cepting  an  office,  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the  act,  was  to  be 
punished  by  fine  or  imprisonment;  and  under  like  penalty  the 
payment  of  an  officer  out  of  the  public  treasury  was  forbidden. 
The  intent  of  the  whole  law,  therefore,  was  to  prevent  removal 
from  office,  except  by  consent  of  the  Senate. 

The  Constitution  provided  that  appointments  could  not  be 
made  without  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate ;  but  it  was 
silent  on  the  subject  of  removals.  The  power  of  removal  had 
been  assumed,  in  practice,  to  belong  to  the  President  alone  and 
he  had  always  exercised  it  at  will,  though  not  always  without 
question.  There  had  been  discussion  of  the  question,  notably 
in  the  time  of  Jackson  when  he  sought  to  enforce  his  maxim 
that  "to  the  victors  belong  the  spoils,"  by  wholesale  removals 
to  provide  places  for  his  friends.  But  the  better  authority 
was  with  the  President's  claim  of  right  to  remove  at  will  with 
out  consulting  the  Senate. 

Sumner  favored  the  Tenure  of  Office  Bill  and  spoke  in  its 
favor,  arguing  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  Senate  to  protect 
these  officeholders  against  the  President,  who  had  become,  he 
declared,  "  the  enemy  of  his  country/'  He  was  called  to  order 
by  McDougall  of  California,  a  Democratic  member,  for  the  use 
of  this  expression  when  speaking  of  the  President.  The  Chair 
sustained  Sumner  and  he  proceeded  after  some  farther  inter 
ruption.  As  there  was  some  question  about  the  words  he  had 
used,  he  proceeded  to  read  them  as  taken  down  by  the  stenog 
rapher,  when  he  was  again  called  to  order  by  Doolittle  of  Wis 
consin.  The  presiding  officer  again  sustained  Sumner,  when 
the  decision  was  appealed  from  and,  after  some  confusion  and 
other  motions,  one  to  lay  the  appeal  on  the  table  carried  and 
Sumner  proceeded. 

He  declared  that  the  President  had  usurped  the  powers  of 
Congress,  to  kindle  anew  the  fires  of  rebellion,  by  setting  up 
illegal  governments  in  the  South  and  by  usurping  the  power 
of  removal  from  office  without  consulting  the  Senate,  that  he 
might  make  places  for  his  partisans  and  silence  others  by  his 
threats,  that  the  brutal  language  he  employed  to  declare  his 
purpose  showed  the  spirit  in  which  he  acted,  that  had  Lincoln 
been  spared,  the  necessity  for  such  legislation  as  the  Tenure  of 
Office  Bill  would  never  have  occurred.  Sumner  proposed  to 
amend  the  bill  so  that  it  would  reach  officers  of  smaller  salaries 
than  those  included  in  it.  But  other  Senators  objected  that 
this  would  impose  too  much  labor  and  require  too  much  time 
of  the  Senate.  Sumner  declared  that  merely  because  the  vic 
tims  were  so  numerous  was  no  reason  why  the  sacrifice  should 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER  565 

be  allowed  to  proceed,  that  they  had  not  hesitated  during  the 
war  to  act  on  the  nomination  of  military  and  naval  officers, 
though  they  were  counted  by  thousands.  He  said  he  was  willing 
to  act  on  an  inspector  or  night  watchman,  if  lie  could  thereby 
protect  such  humble  officials  from  Executive  tyranny,  that  they 
were  sent  to  the  Senate  for  work  and  that  they  should  sur 
round  the  citizen  with  all  possible  safeguards. 

Sumner's  amendment  failed;  but  the  bill  passed  both  the 
Senate  and  the  House.  It  was  vetoed  by  the  President  and 
was  then  passed  over  his  veto  and  thus  became  a  law.  It  is  curi 
ous  to  note  that  the  bill,  as  originally  introduced,  excepted 
Cabinet  officers  from  its  operation.  It  was  thought  that  by 
reason  of  their  confidential  relation  to  the  President  his  choice 
of  them  should  be  uncontrolled.  It  was  made  applicable  to 
them  by  an  amendment.  It  was  under  this  amendment  that 
the  chief  article  of  impeachment  of  President  Johnson,  was 
subsequently  framed.  He  was  charged  with  wilfully  violating 
the  Tenure  of  Office  Law  in  removing  Secretary  Stanton  from 
the  Cabinet,  after  the  Senate  had  once  refused  to  concur  in  his 
removal.  But  the  law  was  upon  the  whole  a  source  of  trouble  to 
its  authors.  It  tied  Johnson's  hands.  But  two  years  later  when 
Grant  had  become  President  the  purpose  of  its  passage  was  con 
fessed,  when  many  of  its  advocates  voted  for  a  modification  of 
it  which  amounted  to  its  repeal.  It  fell  to  Grant  as  they 
thought,  to  cleanse  the  Augean  stables  of  the  men  Johnson  had 
placed  in  office  before  the  law  was  passed.  He  declined  to  un 
dertake  this,  until  the  law  was  amended. 

Sumner,  however,  was  opposed  to  the  change,  brought  about, 
as  he  insisted,  at  the  instance  of  President  Grant,  to  make  a  way 
for  the  very  abuse  that  the  law  had  been  enacted  to  correct.  A 
bill  for  its  repeal  was  passed  by  the  House  five  days  after  Grant 
became  President,  without  a  reference  to  a  committee.  But  the 
Senate  was  not  so  pliant.  It  was  there  referred  to  a  com 
mittee.  A  substitute  was  reported  and  discussed.  The  sub 
stitute  was  referred  again  and  amended  and,  after  further  dis 
cussion,  it  was  passed.  Sumner  was  asked  by  a  member  of 
President  Grant's  Cabinet  to  withdraw  his  opposition  to  its 
repeal,  urging  that  the  President  felt  strongly  upon  it.  But  he 
declined.  He  thought  it  a  beneficent  statute  and  should  be 
maintained.  He  was  more  consistent  than  those  Republicans 
who  voted  to  pass  it  to  tie  Johnson's  hands,  because  they  were 
not  in  harmony  with  him  and  voted  to  change  it,  so  that  it 
might  not  tie  Grant's  hands,  because  they  were  in  harmony 
with  him.  To  them,  at  least,  its  passage  and  virtual  repeal 
were  not  creditable.  If  it  was  a  bad  law,  it  should  not  have  been 


566  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

passed.  If  it  was  a  good  law  it  should  have  been  continued. 
They  clearly  should  not  have  tied  the  hands  of  one  President 
from  making  appointments,  because  he  was  a  Democrat  and 
loosened  the  hands  of  another  President  so  that  he  could  make 
them,  without  stint,  because  he  was  a  Republican. 

One  of  the  alleged  reasons  for  passing  the  bill  was  that  it 
would  aid  the  work  of  reconstruction.  But  this  was  little  more 
than  a  pretext.  The  officeholders  whose  places  were  in  question, 
could  have  little  to  do  with  reconstruction.  They  were  mostly 
clerks  in  the  Departments  and  others  whose  duties  were  purely 
ministerial. 

At  this  session  of  Congress  the  most  important  Reconstruc 
tion  Law  was  passed.  Hostility  to  the  President  had  become 
pronounced.  Little  heed  was  now.  paid  by  Congress  to  his 
wishes.  He  had  attempted  to  take  the  whole  subject  of  re 
construction  into  his  own  hands.  As  a  result,  Congress  saw  the 
consequent  defiant  action  of  the  Southern  people  in  rejecting 
the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  and  in  the  riot  at  New  Orleans 
caused  by  their  determination  to  break  up  a  meeting  called  to 
ask  of  the  Convention  then  drafting  the  new  constitution,  to 
consider  the  question  of  negro  suffrage ;  when  forty  defenceless 
people  were  shot  dead  and  one  hundred  and  sixty  more  were 
wounded.  The  facts  were  now  being  brought  out  into  clear 
light  under  a  Congressional  investigation.  Congress  saw  sim 
ilar  outbreaks  in  other  Southern  States.  It  saw  the  systematic 
terrorization  of  Union  men  there,  who  were  leaving  their  homes 
on  account  of  it.  It  was  estimated  that  more  than  a  thousand 
defenceless  negroes  and  many  whites  had  been  killed  and  no 
attempt  made  to  punish  the  murderers.  Congress  felt  the  situa 
tion  could  be  neglected  no  longer.  Reconstruction  thus  became 
the  chief  work  of  the  session. 

After  much  debate  the  House  passed  a  bill  dividing  the  ten 
States  that  had  been  in  rebellion  into  five  military  districts, 
the  Commander  of  the  Army  to  take  charge  of  them  through 
five  officers,  not  below  the  rank  of  Brigadier-General.  They 
were  to  have  supervision  of  the  peace  in  their  precincts,  with  the 
power  to  use  the  civil  tribunals  already  established,  if  deemed 
competent,  otherwise  to  employ  courts  martial  in  their  stead. 
Prompt  trials  were  to  be  guaranteed,  but  no  sentence  was  to 
be  executed,  until  approved  by  the  commanding  officer  of  the 
district.  In  this  form  the  bill  passed  the  House  and  reached 
the  Senate  on  February  thirteenth,  1867.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  it  was  purely  a  military  bill,  designed  for  protection 
alone.  It  contained  no  provisions  for  suffrage,  or  for  the 
exclusion  of  those  who  had  taken  part  in  rebellion  from  acting 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  567 

in  the  government.  The  House  also  passed  about  the  same  time 
a  bill  for  the  reconstruction  of  Louisiana,  drafted  on  lines  sug 
gested  by  Sumner  at  the  previous  session. 

The  lateness  of  date  counselled  promptness  of  action;  for 
the  session  would  close  on  March  fourth  and  the  delay  for  the 
President's  veto  must  also  be  allowed.  The  Senate  at  once  en 
tered  upon  their  consideration  and  continued  for  three  days 
and  until  three  A.  M.  of  the  fourth.  Sumner  expressed  him 
self  willing  to  vote  for  both  as  presented,  if  it  was  thought  best 
to  hasten  their  passage.  The  one  he  thought  embodied  a  com 
plete  system  of  protection  and  the  other  a  complete  plan  of 
reconstruction.  But  the  discussion  revealed  great  differences 
of  opinion  upon  them  among  Senators.  Some  were  content 
with  the  military,  wishing  to  secure  simple  protection  to  the 
loyal  people  in  the  South;  others  wished  measures  of  recon 
struction  added.  Upon  reconstruction  too  there  were  differ 
ences.  Some  were  content  with  equal  suffrage  for  the  freed- 
men;  others  wished  those  who  had  been  in  rebellion  excluded 
from  voting.  With  the  hope  of  bringing  some  order  out  of 
this  chaos  and  securing  prompt  action,  a  caucus  of  Republicans 
was  called  for  the  forenoon  of  February  sixteenth. 

At  this  caucus  a  committee  of  seven  was  appointed  to  which 
all  the  pending  propositions  were  to  be  referred.  The  members 
of  this  committee  were  Sherman,  Fessenden,  Howard,  Harris, 
Frelinghuysen,  Trumbull  and  Sumner.  Sumner  moved  in 
the  Committee  that  the  existing  governments  be  declared  in 
valid  in  the  proposed  bill.  This  carried.  He  also  moved  that 
the  States  in  question  be  designated  simply,  "rebel  states." 
This  also  carried.  But  when  he  moved  that  in  the  constitutions 
to  be  drafted  by  the  "  rebel  states  "  preparatory  to  reconstruc 
tion,  there  shall  be  no  exclusion  from  suffrage  on  account  of 
color,  this  was  voted  down,  only  one  other  member  of  the  com 
mittee,  Howard,  sustaining  him.  Sherman,  the  Chairman  of 
the  committee  was  strongly  against  it.  Sumner's  motion  to 
exclude  those  who  had  been  in  rebellion  from  suffrage,  also 
failed,  as  did  also  an  effort  to  substitute  the  Louisiana  bill  that 
had  been  passed  by  the  House,  making  it  apply  to  all  the  in 
surrectionary  States.  These  efforts  failing,  Sumner  then  gave 
notice  to  the  committee  that  he  would  appeal  to  the  caucus, 
considering  the  bill  in  the  form  drafted  by  the  committee  highly 
objectionable. 

When  the  committee  reported  their  bill  to  the  caucus,  he 
stated  his  objections  and  moved  an  amendment  to  it,  in  en 
larged  form,  to  the  effect  that  each  State  in  its  new  constitution 
should  incorporate  a  provision  that  all  citizens  without  regard 


568  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to  color,  with  a  proper  residence,  should  be  voters.  He  argued 
that  now  was  the  time  to  settle  this  question  and  supersede  its 
discussion  in  the  Southern  States,  where  repetitions  of  the  New 
Orleans  riots  could  be  expected  to  attend  it.  He  thought  its 
discussion  would  cause  disturbances  in  every  State  and  village 
from  the  Potomac  to  the  Rio  Grande.  It  was  near  the  noon 
hour  and  members  were  anxious  to  vote.  The  vote  was  taken  by. 
ayes  and  noes,  the  members  standing  to  be  counted.  There 
were  two  counts  and  it  carried,  seventeen  ayes  to  fifteen  noes. 

Thus  in  this  small  meeting  and  in  this  summary  way  the 
fate  of  the  great  question  of  equal  suffrage  for  the  freedmen 
was  determined.  For  Sumner  it  had  been  a  labor  of  years  fol 
lowed  persistently  on  the  platform,  at  the  hustings,  in  the 
Senate,  by  letter  and  by  personal  entreaty.  Commencing  with 
three  or  four  votes  in  the  Senate,  bv  constant  agitation  it  had 
grown  until  it  now  triumphed,  by  being  made,  in  caucus,  the 
policy  of  the  dominant  party,  to  which  the  Republican  votes 
were  pledged.  It  was  an  occasion  of  great  satisfaction  to  Sum 
ner  and  to  those  who  had  stood  faithfully  by  him.  Clearer 
than  his  associates  he  had  foreseen  the  coming  issue  and  had 
pressed  it  to  a  solution.  Some  complain  that  it  is  not  settled 
yet.  But  it  has  given  the  South  almost  half  a  century  of  com 
parative  peace  and,  with  farther  education  for  the  black  race, 
promises  still  greater  results  for  the  future. 

In  the  form  the  bill  was  approved,  Sumner  confessed  it  was 
not  all  he  desired.  He  would  have  provided  provisional  Civil 
governments  for  these  States  to  shape  them  into  their  new 
political  life  and  superintend  the  transition.  He  would  also 
have  provided  a  means  for  the  freedmen  to  secure  an  education 
and  homestead.  But  these  things  he  could  not  secure.  Even 
in  triumph  he  was  constrained  to  confess  that :  "  It  is  in  pol 
itics  as  in  life, — we  rarely  obtain  precisely  what  we  desire." 

During  the  evening  session  of  that  day,  Sherman,  chairman 
of  the  caucus  committee,  moved  the  bill  as  amended  by  the 
caucus  as  a  substitute  for  the  House  Bill.  It  was  Saturday, 
February  sixteenth.  The  debate  was  protracted  late  into  the 
night.  At  midnight  Sumner,  assured  that  without  further 
amendment  it  would  receive  the  Republican  vote,  left  the  Cham 
ber  for  his  home.  It  had  been  an  eventful  day  to  him.  At 
six  o'clock  Sunday  morning  the  vote  was  taken  and  the  bill 
passed  by  a  party  vote,  twenty-nine  to  ten.  The  friends  of 
the  measure  saw  the  magnitude  of  the  measure  and  there  was 
corresponding  exultation  among  them.  Sumner  said  Wilson 
wished  to  dance  with  somebody. 

When  the  bill  reached  the  House  it  was  at  first  rejected. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  569 

Only  thirteen  days  of  the  session  remained  and  it  was  feared 
the  'measure  would  fail  for  lack  of  time.  A  veto  of  the  Presi 
dent  was  assured  and  he  was  also  permitted  by  the  Constitution 
to  hold  it  ten  days,  exclusive  of  Sundays,  for  consideration. 
The  House  Republicans  finally  agreed  to  pass  it  with  an  Amend 
ment  excluding  ex-rebels,  disqualified  by  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment  from  holding  office,  from  the  right  to  vote  for,  or 
be  members  of  the  constitutional  conventions  and  from  holding 
any  office  under  the  provisional  governments.  Thus  amended, 
both  the  Senate  and  the  House  passed  the  bill. 

During  the  consideration  of  the  bill  upon  the  House  amend 
ment  there  was  a  passage  in  the  Senate  between  Sumner  and 
Sherman.  The  latter  thought  Sumner  was  asking  too  much, 
that  he  was  hard  to  please,  that  having  secured  all  he  asked, 
equal  suffrage,  in  the  Senate  substitute,  he  was  now  seeking 
more,  the  exclusion  of  ex-rebels  from  power,  and  education  and 
homesteads  for  the  freedmen.  Sumner  reminded  him  that  he 
had  often  before  asked  them ;  and  referred  to  his  speeches  of 
years  previous  to  prove  it.  He  reminded  Sherman  that  he  had 
been  the  laggard  and  how  tardily  he  had  advanced  to  Sumner's 
position  on  equal  suffrage  and  the  exclusion  of  Confederates. 
He  also  gave  Sherman  notice  that  he  expected  to  continue  to 
advance  and  him  to  continue  to  follow.  It  was  a  form  of 
speech  that  Sumner  occasionally  indulged  in  towards  antago 
nists.  His  colleagues  did  not  relish  his  "  lecturing "  and  it 
often  caused  feelings  of  resentment  towards  him. 

There  were  good  grounds  for  Sumner's  claims  in  his  own 
behalf ;  for  he  was  the  aggressive  reformer  of  the  Senate.  Dem 
ocrats  too  liked  occasionally  to  twit  Sumner's  Republican  col 
leagues  about  it.  A  few  days  later,  during  another  debate  on 
reconstruction,  Buckalew  of  Pennsylvania  said :  "  The 
propositions  which  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  makes  one 
year,  and  which  are  criticised  by  his  colleagues  as  extreme, 
inappropriate  and  untimely,  are  precisely  the  propositions 
which  those  colleagues  support  with  greater  zeal  and  vehe 
mence,  if  possible,  than  he,  the  year  following.  In  short,  Sir,  we 
can  foresee  at  one  session  of  Congress  the  character  of  the 
propositions  and  of  the  arguments,  with  which  we  are  to  be 
favored  at  the  next,  in  this  Chamber,  by  looking  to  the  pioneer 
man,  who  goes  forward  in  advance,  his  banner  thrown  out,  his 
cause  announced.,  the  means  by  which  it  shall  be  carried  on  and 
the  objects  in  view  proclaimed  with  force  and  frankness. 

When  the  Reconstruction  Bill  reached  the  President  he  re 
tained  it  the  ten  days  and  on  March  second,  returned  it  with  his 
veto.  It  was  understood  he  held  it  for  the  Constitutional  time 


570  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

so  as  to  permit  it  to  be  defeated  by  dilatory  tactics  in  Congress. 
But  this  was  prevented  by  a  motion  and  it  passed  both  Houses 
over  his  veto  by  a  strict  party  vote,  on  the  same  day  it  was  re 
turned  by  the  President.  Thus  was  enacted  the  famous  Recon 
struction  Law,,  giving  to  the  freedmen,  the  right  to  vote. 

It  is  an  interesting  reflection,  that  it  probably  would  not  have 
been  enacted,  but  for  the  perversity  of  the  Southern  States,  just 
as  slavery  would  not  have  been  wiped  out  where  it  already 
existed,  had  the  Nation  not  been  driven  to  it  by  the  conduct  of 
the  South.  Both  stand  out  as  examples  of  how  an  overruling 
Providence  sometimes  makes  the  wrath  of  man  to  praise  Him. 
It  was  the  feeling  of  many  Northern  statesmen  that  if  the 
insurrectionary  states  voted  to  ratify  the  Fourteenth  Amend 
ment,  they  should  be  restored  to  their  privileges  of  state 
hood.  Such  a  resolution  was  placed  in  the  Republican  platform 
of  the  State  of  New  York.  It  was  believed  that  the  South, 
being  deprived  of  the  increased  representation  their  slaves  had 
given  them  so  that,  not  being  permitted  to  vote,  this  Amend 
ment  would  forbid  them  being  counted  as  a  basis  of  representa 
tion,  she  would  grant  the  suffrage  to  her  colored  people.  But 
the  South  rejected  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  She  had  Pres 
ident  Johnson  on  her  side.  She  thought  that  with  the  patron 
age  at  his  disposal,  he  could  compel  the  North  to  allow  her  in 
creased  representation  to  remain.  The  North  was  driven  to 
another  way  of  dealing  with  the  question  and  she  passed  this 
law  for  equal  suffrage.  Two  of  Sumner's  great  purposes  in 
public  life  had  now  been  accomplished.  By  the  Thirteenth 
Amendment  to  the  Constitution  slavery  was  abolished ;  and  now 
the  right  of  the  freedmen  to  vote  was  secured.  This  right  was 
soon  to  be  sealed  by  the  Fifteenth  Amendment. 

One  of  the  last  measures  passed  by  this  Congress  was  a  law 
requiring  the  next  Congress  to  meet  immediately  on  the  expira 
tion  of  the  present.  The  distrust  of  the  President  had  become 
so  great  that  it  was  not  deemed  wise  to  leave  matters  in  his 
hands  for  the  next  nine  months  without  retaining  some  means 
of  controlling  him.  It  was  feared  that  he  would  attempt  to 
place  some  such  construction  upon  the  Reconstruction  Law  as 
would  defeat  its  intended  operation.  The  new  Congress  there 
fore  met  promptly  on  March  fourth. 

Its  first  work  was  to  pass  a  supplementary  Reconstruction 
Law,  prescribing  in  detail  a  method  of  registering  voters  and 
summoning  conventions  to  frame  constitutions  in  the  insur 
rectionary  States,  preparatory  to  readmission  to  representation. 
This  bill  was  passed  and  vetoed  and  passed  again  over  the 
President's  veto,  by  a  vote  of  forty  ayes  to  seven  noes  in  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  571 

Senate  and  one  hundred  and  fourteen  ayes  to  twenty-five  noes 
in  the  House.  The  vote  showed  the  opposition  that  the  last 
election  had  developed  to  the  President.  This  Congress  ad 
journed  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  March,  but  with  the  same  want 
of  confidence  in  the  President  its  predecessor  had  shown,  its 
adjournment  was  only  until  July  third.  The  Senate  was,  how 
ever,  convened  in  executive  session  on  April  first,  by  proclama 
tion  of  the  President.  During  this  adjournment  of  Congress 
the  expected  happened.  By  an  adroit  construction  placed  upon 
the  Reconstruction  Law,  by  the  Attorney-General,  in  an  opinion 
furnished  the  President,  it  was  seen  that  its  operation  would  be 
hampered.  As  soon  as  Congress  reconvened  on  July  third,  it 
passed  another  supplementary  law  to  obviate  the  construction 
placed  upon  the  original  act.  This  was  vetoed  as  usual  by  the 
President  and  as  usual  passed  over  his  veto,  by  an  overwhelm 
ing  majority. 

When  both  of  these  supplementary  acts  were  before  the  Sen 
ate,  Sumner  offered  amendments  to  them,  requiring  the  con 
stitutions  of  each  of  the  States  to  contain  a  provision  requiring 
the  legislature  to  establish  and  maintain  a  system  of  public 
schools  open  to  all  without  distinction  of  race  or  color.  He 
would  also  have  required  free  schools  as  a  condition  of  recon 
struction.  Some  Senators  said,  "  Wait  till  the  constitutions 
formed  are  presented  to  Congress,"  but  he  said,  "  No,  that 
would  not  be  fair."  He  wished  to  be  plain  and  explicit.  They 
had  the  power  and  they  should  seize  the  present  moment  to  ex 
ercise  it.  Some  would  act  upon  the  principle  of  doing  as  little 
as  possible,  but  he  would  do  as  much  as  possible  that  would 
redound  to  the  good  of  all  and  to  the  National  fame.  Electors 
by  the  hundred  thousand  would  soon  exercise  the  franchise  for 
the  first  time,  and  without  preparation  for  it  and  they  should 
be  educated  promptly.  Without  education  all  this  other  benefi 
cent  legislation  might  be  a  failure  and  the  gift  bestowed  be 
perilous.  He  asked  that  education  accompany  and  sustain 
suffrage. 

"  I  plead  now,"  he  said,  "  for  education.  Nothing  is  more 
beautiful  or  more  precious.  Education  decorates  the  life,  while 
it  increases  all  our  powers.  It  is  the  charm  of  society,  the 
solace  of  solitude,  and 'the  multiple  of  every  faculty.  It  adds 
incalculably  to  the  capacity  of  the  individual  and  to  the  re 
sources  of  the  community.  Careful  inquiry  establishes  what 
reason  declares,  that  labor  is  productive  in  proportion  to  its 
education.  There  is  no  art  it  does  not  advance.  There  is  no 
form  of  enterprise  it  does  not  encourage  and  quicken.  It  brings 
victory  and  is  itself  the  greatest  of  victories." 


572  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

He  argued  that  had  these  states  been  more  enlightened  they 
never  would  have  rebelled,  that  statistics  showed  that  in  the 
slave  States  there  were  half  a  million  white  people  over  twenty 
years  of  age,  who  could  not  read  or  write  while  in  the  free 
States  with  double  the  native  white  population  there  were  only 
half  as  many.  Here  was  the  source  of  the  Rebellion ;  a  popula 
tion,  that  could  neither  read  nor  write,  naturally  did  not  either 
comprehend  or  appreciate  good  government.  In  Massachusetts 
free  schools  had  been  founded  and  maintained  according  to  the 
words  of  her  statute,  "  that  learning  may  not  be  buried  in  the 
graves  of  our  fathers,"  in  Virginia  her  Governor  had  publicly 
thanked  God  that  there  were  no  free  schools  nor  printing  there, 
and  the  hope  was  expressed  that  they  would  not  have  them  these 
hundred  years.  The.  example  of  each  had  spread.  In  Massa 
chusetts  one  in  four  hundred  and  forty-six  of  the  adult  native 
white  population  could  not  read  or  write;  in  Virginia  one  in 
five ;  in  Connecticut  one  in  two  hundred  and  fifty-six ;  in  South 
Carolina  one  in  eight ;  in  New  Hampshire  one  in  one  hundred 
and  ninety-two;  in  North  Carolina  one  in  three.  Hence  he 
traced  the  Rebellion.  He  asked  them  to  be  taught  by  this  ex 
perience  and  demand  now  a  new  safeguard  for  the  future.  As 
the  soldier  would  disappear  let  his  place  be  supplied  by  the 
schoolmaster. 

But  the  proposition  met  with  opposition.  Other  Senators 
more  easily  exhausted  than  he  and  feeling  less  interest  in  the 
subject,  were  growing  tired  of  reconstruction.  They  wished  to 
be  done  with  it.  Again  they  insisted  he  was  too  late  and 
asked  why  he  had  not  called  attention  to  it  earlier.  But  he 
answered  he  had  done  so,  long  before,  as  early  as  1865,  and  had 
continued  to  do  so  ever  since,  in  season  and  out  of  season.  The 
fact  was,  in  the  larger  interest  and  greater  zeal  with  which  he 
had  pressed  for  equal  suffrage,  the  subject  of  education  had 
been  overlooked  by  them.  Frelinghuysen  insisted,  that  to 
undertake  to  add  new  conditions  to  the  reconstruction  measure, 
the  last  Congress  had  passed,  would  be  bad  faith;  that  such 
was  not  the  way  to  do  business;  the  nation  should  keep  its 
faith.  Sumner  answered  that  the  law  was  not  yet  old  enough 
to  have  invited  action  upon  it  so  as  to  prejudice  any  one.  Pat 
terson  of  New  Hampshire  asked  if  he  'thought  it  possible  to 
establish  a  system  of  common  schools  in  the  South  correspond 
ing  to  those  of  New  England  without  first  confiscating  the 
large  estates  and  dividing  them  up  into  small  homesteads  so 
that  there  might  be  small  landholders,  able  and  willing  to  sup 
port  them  by  taxation.  When  the  vote  was  taken  on  Simmer's 
amendment  it  was  a  tie  and  so  the  amendment  was  lost.  When 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  573 

Sumner  moved  the  same  amendment  to  the  Reconstruction  Bill 
of  July,  it  was  voted  out  of  order  under  the  rule  limiting  the 
business  of  the  session. 

It  was  with  much  regret  that  Sumner  saw  this  new  failure 
of  his  effort  for  education.  The  freedmen  were  coming  to  their 
new  right,  eager  for  improvement  and,  as  he  well  knew,  needing 
it  badly,  to  qualify  them  for  citizenship.  A  provision  of  some 
kind  should  have  been  attempted  to  afford  this  much  needed 
improvement.  The  regret  continued  and  time  has  justified 
him.  It  has  been  a  subject  of  much  earnest  thought,  how  to 
educate  and  elevate  the  colored  people  of  the  South.  George 
Peabody,  a  philanthropic  citizen  of  Massachusetts,  had  recently 
given  two  million  dollars  for  the  promotion  of  education  there 
and  in  the  destitute  portion  of  the  South-West,  and  Sumner  at 
this  session  moved  and  had  passed  a  resolution  of  thanks  and 
a  gold  medal  to  be  given  him  in  the  name  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States  as  a  recognition  of  his  beneficence.  In  a  still 
wider  spirit  Sumner  had  spoken  in  favor  of  a  medal  to  Cyrus 
W.  Field  for  his  work  in  the  construction  of  the  Atlantic 
cable.  He  had  carried  a  reduction  of  the  tariff  on  books  and 
charts  and  educational  and  philosophical  apparatus.  All  these, 
this  Congress  had  voted.  He  also  advocated,  though  unsuc 
cessfully,  a  department  or  bureau  of  education.  Though  edu 
cation  for  the  colored  people  of  the  South  also  failed,  yet  after 
all  is  it  not  in  the  hands  of  the  colored  people  themselves  that 
this  question  has  found  its  best  solution?  Around  their  own 
churches  and  Sabbath-schools  have  grown  up  literary  societies 
for  secular  culture  and  in  the  hands  of  their  ministers  and 
teachers,  such  men  as  Booker  Washington,  the  best  progress  has 
been  made.  Their  own  desire  for  improvement  has  been  the 
best  sign. 

Sumner  was  not  the  man  to  be  tamely  bound,  by  an  iron  rule, 
that  prevented  legislative  action  upon  measures  that  he  deemed 
important.  Though  sometimes  he  yielded  to  such  a  rule,  it  was 
only  after  a  stern  struggle  against  it.  There  were  three 
special  sessions  of  this  Congress  before  the  opening  of  its  first 
regular  session  in  December,  one  commencing  March  fourth, 
another  commencing  July  third  and  still  another  commencing 
November  twenty-first.  Sumner  was  one  of  the  earnest  ad 
vocates  of  these  special  sessions.  He  opposed  each  adjourn 
ment,  but  the  last,  which  was  immediately  before  the  com 
mencement  of  the  regular  session.  His  argument  was  that  the 
President  was  a  constant  disturber  and  a  mischief-maker,  and 
so  long  as  his  administration  continued  it  was  the  duty  of  Con 
gress  to  be  on  guard  and  perpetual  watch,  against  him.  He 


574  LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

felt  that  they  should  continue  in  session  during  the  summer  so 
as  to  be  at  hand  for  any  emergency  that  might  arise.  The  head 
of  one  of  the  Departments  had  assumed  to  appoint  to  office 
persons  in  the  South,  who  had  taken  part  in  the  Rebellion  and 
whose  disability  to  hold  office  had  never  been  removed.  If  Con 
gress  were  adjourned  these  appointees  would  hold  over  until 
the  regular  session  in  December.  Then  would  come  up  a  ques 
tion  as  to  their  pay  for  services  rendered  during  the  recess.  If 
the  Senate  were  in  session  it  could  refuse  to  confirm  the  ap 
pointments  and  thus  that  vexatious  question  could  be  avoided. 
But  others  were  more  eager  to  escape  the  heats  of  Washington 
and  less  devoted  to  their  work.  The  most  he  could  accomplish 
was  the  sessions  held.  This  much  was  accomplished  only  after 
overcoming  considerable  opposition. 

But  when  they  met,  there  was  a  further  difficulty.  At  the 
opening  of  the  July  session  a  caucus  of  the  Republican  Sena 
tors  was  held  at  which  a  resolution  was  passed  to  confine  the 
business  of  the  session  to  removing  obstructions  to  the  Recon 
struction  Laws  and  giving  them  the  scope  intended.  Sumner 
had  attended  this  caucus  and  taken  part  in  its  proceedings  and 
had  voted  against  this  resolution.  He  had  gone  to  the  caucus, 
without  knowing  what  was  to  be  considered,  and  after  the  vote 
was  taken  on  the  resolution  he  arose  in  the  caucus  and  said  he 
would  not  be  bound  by  it.  Fessenden  answered,  Then  you 
should  not  have  voted,  if  you  did  not  intend  to  be  bound  by  the 
decision  of  the  majority.  Sumner  replied  that  he  was  a 
Senator.  He  insisted  that  he  was  under  an  obligation  to  dis 
charge  his  duties  as  a  Senator  and  that  they  could  not  tie  his 
hands  from  the  discharge  of  that  duty  by  invoking  a  rule  of  a 
caucus.  He  argued  that  it  was  his  duty  to  resist  the  offensive 
resolution  to  the  last  in  the  caucus,  and  if  beaten  there,  renew 
the  fight  against  it  in  the  Senate.  He  was  therefore  offering 
other  business  when  he  was  interrupted  by  Fessenden  who  in 
sisted  on  the  limit  agreed  on  in  the  caucus.  An  altercation  be 
tween  them  ensued  in  which  some  bitter  expressions  were  used 
by  Fessenden.  But  the  rule  of  the  caucus  was  adhered  to  and 
by  resolution  was  made  the  rule  of  the  Senate. 

According  to  the  rules  governing  parties  in  caucus,  as  we 
have  come  to  recognize  them,  this  disposition  of  the  matter  was 
correct.  A  caucus  could  be  of  little  use,  if,  after  its  action, 
parties  were  still  free  to  follow  their  own  bent,  untrammelled 
by  what  had  been  agreed  to  in  it.  It  was  asked  of  Sumner  in 
this  altercation  if  he  had  not  received  the  benefit  of  the  same 
rule  when  the  caucus  had  voted  to  require  equal  suffrage  for  all, 
in  the  future  constitutions  of  the  Confederate  States.  Sumner 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  575 

admitted  he  had.  What  if  the  minority  had  then  refused  to  be 
bound  by  the  vote  of  the  caucus?  was  quickly  asked.  But 
Sumner  insisted  the  cases  were  different,  that  to  repudiate  a 
proposition  for  liberty  was  very  different  from  repudiating  one 
against  it.  Fessenden  bluntly  retorted  that  there  was  no  dif 
ference  at  all,  that  when  one  promised  to  do  a  thing,  with  a  full 
understanding,  he  had  no  right  to  do  otherwise,  whether  it  be 
one  way  or  the  other.  He  assumed  that  when  a  man  took  part 
in  the  proceedings  of  a  caucus  he  impliedly  promised  to  be 
bound  by  its  action.  This  Sumner  denied.  He  regarded  a 
caucus  vote  as  the  recorded  result  of  the  deliberations  of  politi 
cal  associates,  so  far  as  practicable,  a  guide  for  their  action, 
but  not  a  constraint  embodied  in  a  perpetual  record. 

Another  measure  of  far-reaching  importance  belongs  to  this 
period  of  Sumner's  life.  I  have  postponed  the  mention  of  it  so 
that  the  work  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress  might  be  con 
cluded  without  a  break,  before  entering  upon  it.  I  refer  to  the 
purchase  of  what  is  now  the  Territory  of  Alaska  from  Russia. 
This  negotiation  had  been  secretly  conducted  by  Secretary 
Seward  during  the  winter  and  spring  of  1867  and  the  treaty 
was  signed  by  him  and  the  Russian  Minister  on  March  thir 
tieth.  Late  the  evening  before,  Sumner,  on  reaching  home, 
found  a  note  waiting  for  him,  from  the  Secretary  asking  if  he 
could  come  to  his  house,  saying  that  he  had  a  matter  of  public 
business  about  which  he  wished  to  confer  with  him  at  once. 
Sumner  went  to  the  Secretary's  house,  but  found  he  had  already 
gone  to  the  Department.  His  son,  the  Assistant  Secretary,  how 
ever,  was  there  and  the  Russian  Minister  soon  came  in  and  for 
the  first  time  Sumner  learned  that  a  treaty  was  in  progress  for 
the  cession  of  Russian  America.  The  minister  took  a  map  and 
pointed  out  the  boundary  and  explained  the  terms  of  the  pro 
posed  treaty.  Sumner  expressed  no  opinion  upon  it,  but  went 
over  the  whole  matter  carefully.  They  separated  at  midnight, 
the  Minister  going  to  the  State  Department,  where  the  treaty 
was  being  copied  and  he  added,  as  he  bade  Sumner  good-night, 
an  entreaty  that  he  would  not  fail  them,  knowing  how  im 
portant  it  was  to  have  with  them  the  Chairman  of  the  Commit 
tee  on  Foreign  Relations  of  the  Senate.  The  treaty  could  not 
be  made  without  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate  and  it 
was  the  report  of  this  Committee  which  would  largely  deter 
mine  the  action  of  the  Senate. 

The  treaty  was  signed  at  four  o'clock  on  the  morning  of 
March  thirtieth,  which  was  the  last  day  of  this  session  of  Con 
gress.  An  adjournment  was  then  to  take  place  to  July  third. 
The  day  it  was  signed  the  treaty  was  sent  to  the  Senate  for  its 


576  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

consideration  and  was  at  once  referred  to  Sumner's  Committee. 
The  President  convened  the  Senate  in  Executive  session  the 
next  day.  The  members  of  the  Committee  were  Sumner,  Fes- 
senden,  of  Maine,  Cameron,  of  Pennsylvania,  Harlan,  of  Iowa, 
Patterson,  of  New  Hampshire,  and  Johnson,  of  Maryland.  On 
April  eighth  the  Committee  reported  it  to  the  Senate  with  a 
recommendation  that  it  advise  and  consent  to  the  treaty;  and 
the  Senate  then  proceeded  to  its  consideration.  Sumner  spoke 
at  length  the  next  day  on  the  subject.  As  it  was  in  Executive 
session,  the  proceedings  were  secret  and  no  reporters  were 
present.  The  ban  of  secrecy,  however,  was  afterwards  removed, 
and  having  been  requested  to  reduce  his  speech  to  writing  so  it 
could  be  published  as  a  means  of  furnishing  information  on  the 
subject  to  the  public,  Sumner  consented  and  it  was  afterwards 
written  out  and  published.  Though  he  spoke  from  notes  of 
less  than  a  sheet  of  paper,  for  three  hours,  his  speech  as 
published  occupies  one  hundred  and  sixty-five  pages.  He 
elaborated  it  in  preparing  it  for  publication. 

It  began  with  a  description  of  the  Territory.  As  ceded  it  was 
estimated  to  contain  570,000  square  miles  and  the  price  fixed 
was  $7,200,000,  in  gold,  or  about  $12.64  per  square  mile  or 
twenty  cents  per  acre. 

The  country  was  at  this  time  comparatively  unknown  and 
here  lay  one  of  the  chief  difficulties  the  treaty  had  to  encounter. 
There  had  been  no  preparation  for  it, — no  sentiment  in  its 
favor  worked  up ;  and  being  foreign  country  and  in  a  northern 
latitude,  little  opportunity  had  been  offered  for  general  in 
formation  about  it.  A  trip  to  it  was  not  then  a  delightful 
summer  excursion  over  deep  seas  of  bright  and  sparkling  waters, 
studded  with  beautiful  islands  and  hemmed  with  rock-bound 
coasts,  among  which  palatial  steamers  threaded  their  way  carry 
ing  annually  thousands  of  tourists.  The  region  was  then  hardly 
known  beyond  its  savage  inhabitants  or  the  hardy  fishermen  or 
solitary  trader  and  his  voyageurs,  who  made  their  way  thither 
to  catch  the  fish  that  swarmed  its  waters  in  shoals,  or  to 
traffic  in  the  rich  peltries  the  country  produced.  In  prepar 
ing  his  speech,  Sumner  was  obliged  to  glean  his  information 
from  many  sources.  Books  of  travel  of  early  voyagers,  informa 
tion  furnished  by  the  reports  of  trading  fur  companies  as  well 
as  works  in  the  Bussian  language  which  he  was  obliged  to  have 
translated  for  him.  All  were  laid  under  contribution. 

After  describing  the  extent  of  the  proposed  purchase  and  the 
title  of  Russia  to  the  country,  Sumner  explained  the  early 
history  of  the  treaty.  The  matter  had  been  mooted  as  early  as 
the  administration  of  President  Buchanan,  when  it  was  sug- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SVMNER  577 

gested,  to  Russia,  by  Senator  Gwin  of  California,  professing  to 
speak  for  the  President  unofficially,  that  she  was  too  far  away 
to  make  the  most  of  the  possessions  and  that  we  could  derive 
more  from  them.  There  was  also  some  unofficial  talk  about  the 
price.  In  the  succeeding  excitement  of  the  Presidential  elec 
tion  and  the  Rebellion,  the  matter  was  lost  sight  of  for  the 
time.  With  returning  peace,  however,  the  people  on  the  Pacific 
coast  again  pressed  the  matter.  They  wished  new  facilities 
to  obtain  fish,  fur  and  ice.  The  Legislature  of  Washington 
Territory  memorialized  President  Johnson  on  the  subject  and 
the  matter  was  turned  over  to  Secretary  Seward.  Senator 
Cole,  of  California,  also  pressed  the  matter.  Some  rights  that 
Russia  had  granted  to  fur  companies  were  about  to  expire  and 
the  companies  were  seeking  an  extension  of  them  for  twenty- 
five  or  thirty  years.  Their  dealings  had  not  been  satisfactory, 
so  that  a  crisis  in  the  affairs  of  the  company  seemed  at  hand. 
In  the  meantime  Russia  had  been  making  an  investigation  into 
the  value  of  the  possessions  in  consideration  of  an  offer  of 
$5,000,000,  that  had  been  suggested  during  Buchanan's  ad 
ministration.  The  Russian  Minister  had  returned  home  on 
leave  of  absence,  promising  to  promote  the  good  relations  be 
tween  the  countries  on  the  subject.  He  presented  the  matter 
to  his  Government  and,  as  he  was  returning,  he  was  instructed 
to  offer  the  possessions  to  us.  Upon  reaching  this  country  the 
matter  was  concluded  by  telegram,  on  March  twenty-ninth. 
At  four  o'clock  the  next  morning  the  treaty  was  signed  by 
Secretary  Seward  and  the  Russian  Minister,  Baron  Stoeckl, 
acting  for  their  respective  countries. 

In  this  simple  manner  the  important  transaction  was  brought 
about,  without  protocol  or  dispatch  or  other  writing  till  the 
final  conclusion  of  it,  if  we  except  two  short  notes,  in  length, 
as  printed,  not  so  much  as  a  single  page,  and  they  only  con 
veyed  the  expression  on  our  part  that  the  cession  must  be, 
without  any  reservation  of  privilege  or  franchise  of  any  com 
pany,  and  offered  the  $200,000  additional  if  this  be  granted; 
and  it  was.  The  occasion  of  these  two  notes  was  one  monopoly 
enjoyed  by  a  fur  company  and  another  by  an  ice  company, 
which  we  wished  extinguished.  The  treaty  was  to  be  ratified 
within  three  months  and  the  money  to  be  paid  within  ten. 

In  considering  the  treaty  generally,  Sumner  argued  that  it 
would  be  a  great  advantage  to  the  Pacific  Coast  States  inasmuch 
as  they  were  already  procuring  supplies  of  ice  there  and  also 
wished  to  supplant  European  countries  in  its  fisheries  and  its 
trade  in  furs.  Its  coast  abounded  in  numerous  fine  har 
bors,  whereas  that  of  the  United  States  then  had  only  San  Fran- 


578  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

cisco  of  any  considerable  value  from  Panama  to  Puget  Sound. 
This  was  an  important  consideration,,  not  only  as  furnishing  an 
outlet  for  our  own  trade  but  as  reaching  out  for  that  of  China 
and  Japan.  Its  acquisition  would  satisfy  our  Anglo-Saxon 
a  greed  for  land,"  furnishing  increased  size  of  our  territory 
and  increased  consciousness  of  strength.  But  more  than  this, 
it  would  furnish  an  extension  of  Republican  institutions  and 
enable  us  to  dismiss  another  European  monarchy  from  our  con 
tinent,  which  was  destined,  he  believed,  to  become  the  un 
divided  home  of  the  American  people. 

The  acquisition  of  the  strip,  he  argued,  would  anticipate  a 
desire  of  Great  Britain  to  possess  it  because  the  value  of  her 
interior  would  be  depreciated  without  it.  She  had  not  been 
friendly  to  us  during  our  late  war,  while  Russia  had  been  our 
constant  friend.  "  The  Rebellion  which  tempted  so  many 
other  powers  into  its  embrace  could  not  draw  Russia  from  her 
habitual  good  will."  Simultaneously  with  the  talk  in  England 
and  France  of  recognition  of  the  Confederacy,  had  been  the 
appearance  of  a  Russian  fleet  in  New  York  harbor  and  another 
in  that  of  San  Francisco ;  and  then  the  talk  ceased.  It  was 
argued  that  Russia,  standing  alone  against  the  other  powers  of 
Europe,  was  only  wishing  to  create  another  rival  to  them  on 
this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  The  same  wish  may  have  prompted 
her  to  cede  this  territory  to  us  that  it  might  not  fall  into  the 
hands  of  Great  Britain.  It  was  at  all  events  hoped  that  our 
acceptance  of  the  offer  might  show  our  appreciation  of  Russian 
friendship  and  cement  the  feeling  of  amity. 

One  thing  Sumner  did  not  like  and,  while  he  favored  the 
ratification,  he  filed  his  caveat  against  it.  This  treaty  must 
not  be  made  a  precedent  for  indiscriminate  and  costly  an 
nexations.  He  believed  we  were  predestined  to  occupy  the  con 
tinent,  but  our  growth  should  be  by  natural  process,  without 
war  and  without  extensive  purchase.  Our  motto  should  be  that 
of  Goethe,  "Without  haste,  without  rest."  Our  growth  should 
be  by  the  attraction  of  Republican  institutions,  rather  than  by 
blood  or  money. 

But  the  most  elaborate  and  most  valuable  part  of  Sumner's 
speech  was  his  timely  and  elaborate  discussion  of  the  character 
and  value  of  the  territory.  All  talk  of  purchase  must  have 
been  idle,  if  the  people  and  Congress  could  not  be  persuaded  of 
the  value  of  the  possession.  The  opponents  of  the  purchase 
called  it  "  rock  and  ice  "  and  attempted  to  ridicule  the  project 
of  buying  what  they  said  Russia  herself  had  come  to  regard 
as  worthless.  Sumner  showed  how  false  such  talk  was. 

Without  a  knowledge  of  climatic  laws,  the  weather  there,,  he 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  579 

declared,  would  seem  like  a  freak  of  nature.  The  winters  were 
much  less  severe  than  in  corresponding  latitudes  on  the 
Atlantic.  One  traveller  had  spent  seven  winters  there  between 
latitudes  fifty-one  and  fifty-seven  degrees  and  lying  so  near  the 
shore  as  to  have  the  cable  tied  to  the  trees  and  yet  only  once  was 
the  ice  around  his  ship  sufficient  to  bear  the  weight  of  a  man. 
Pines  grew  six  feet  in  diameter  and  one  hundred  and  forty 
feet  high,  while  in  the  corresponding  latitude  on  the  Atlantic 
the  same  species  were  scarcely  sufficient  "  for  studding  sail 
booms."  This  was  owing  to  the  thermal  currents,  correspond 
ing  to  the  Gulf  Stream  in  the  Atlantic,  which  starting  under 
the  Equator  near  the  Philippines,  sweep  northward,  passing 
Japan  and  separating,  one  branch  going  to  Bering  Strait, 
the  other  bending  eastward  along  the  Aleutian  Islands  and 
thence  south  along  the  coast  of  Sitka,  Oregon  and  California. 
They  were  like  pipes  of  hot  water  carrying  the  heat  from  warm 
boilers  to  cool  apartments  above.  Every  ocean  wind  traversing 
these  streams  of  heat  took  up  the  warmth  and  carried  it  to  the 
coast.  These  currents  of  air  and  water  were  aided  by  the  con 
figuration  of  the  coast,  nearly  paralleled  by  lofty  and  im 
penetrable  chains  of  mountains  confining  the  warm  air  from 
the  ocean  and  warding  off  the  cold  from  the  Arctic  regions. 
So  that  the  mean  annual  temperature  of  Sitka  is  about  the 
same  as  that  of  Montreal  though  it  is  ten  degrees  farther 
north.  Its  temperature  in  winter  is  about  the  same  as  that  of 
Washington,  D.  C.,  while  its  summers  are  twenty  degrees  cooler. 
Thus  summers  are  cooler  and  winters  warmer  than  in  corre 
sponding  latitudes  on  the  Atlantic  coast. 

Sumner  explained  that  the  natural  results  expected  to  follow 
these  climatic  conditions  appeared  in  the  products  of  the 
country.  On  every  side  in  the  southern  parts  were  impenetrable 
forests  reaching  from  the  coast  to  the  mountain  tops.  The  trees 
were  superb  pines  fit  for  masts  for  the  largest  ships.  When 
the  timber  disappeared  there  was  long  grass,  berries,  such  as 
raspberries,  elderberries,  cranberries  and  whortleberries,  and 
currants.  Many  of  our  garden  fruits  flourished,  radishes,  cab 
bage,  cauliflower,  peas  and  carrots.  In  the  world's  present 
enormous  and  wasteful  consumption  of  wood,  its  forests  prom 
ised  to  be,  in  the  future,  of  incalculable  value.  In  minerals, 
the  country  revealed  gold,  silver,  copper,  lead  and  coal. 

One  of  the  great  products  of  the  country  was  its  furs.  It 
abounded  in  sea-otters,  seals,  foxes,  the  reindeer,  the  beaver 
and  the  bear  in  great  numbers.  In  one  year  800,000  skins  of 
the  ursine  seals  were  accumulated  at  the  factory  at  Oonalaska. 
The  value  of  the  peltries  was  shown  when  it  was  remembered 


580  LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

that  sea  otters,  at  Sitka,  were  worth  fifty  dollars,  black  fox, 
fifty  dollars,  silver  fox,  forty  dollars.  These  exquisite  furs  had 
been  purchased  by  greedy  traders  from  the  ignorant  natives  for 
a  trifle.  One  early  writer  described  the  scene,  "  Such  as  were 
dressed  in  furs  instantly  stripped  themselves  and  in  return  for 
a  moderate  quantity  of  spike-nails  we  received  sixty-five  sea- 
otter  skins."  As  a  consequence  of  such  dealing  the  poor  natives 
soon  appeared  in  worthless  hides  while  their  rich  conquerors 
appropriated  the  beautiful  furs  they  once  wore.  The  greed  for 
the  exquisite  coat  of  the  sea-otter  became  so  great  that  the 
animal  was  nearly  exterminated. 

Sumner  described  the  fisheries  as  of  equal  if  not  greater  im 
portance  than  the  furs.  Fish  in  great  abundance  were  every 
where  taken  on  the  shore,  around  islands  and  in  every  creek 
and  inlet.  There  were  oysters,  clams,  crabs ;  and  a  dainty  little 
fish  of  the  herring  tribe  called  the  oolachan,  contributed  to  the 
luxury  of  the  table,  so  rich  in  its  oily  nature  that  the  natives 
were  said  to  sometimes  use  it  as  a  candle/'  Besides  these  which 
he  mentioned  only  to  put  aside,  were  the  "  great  staples  of 
commerce  and  mainstays  of  daily  subsistence,  the  salmon,  the 
herring,  the  halibut,  the  cod  and  behind  all  the  whale."  Down 
to  the  discovery  of  the  country,  the  natives  lived  on  fish,  fresh 
in  summer  and  dried  in  winter.  They  were  in  great  plenty. 
In  three  hours'  time  Captain  Cook's  men  caught  a  hundred 
halibuts,  some  of  a  hundred  pounds  and  none  less  than  twenty 
pounds.  This  was  near  Kadiak.  The  writings  of  the  early 
voyagers,  which  Sumner  quoted  in  great  numbers,  abound  in 
similar  experiences.  But,  he  argued,  in  order  that  there  may 
be  profitable  fisheries,  there  must  be  the  existence  of  banks  and 
a  proper  climate  as  well  as  a  market.  Fish  are  not  caught  in 
the  deep  waters  of  the  ocean.  The  shores  here  show  an  im 
mense  extent  of  banks  suitable  for  fisheries,  "  seeming  like  an 
immense  unbroken  sea  meadow  adjoining  the  land  and  con 
stituting  plainly  the  largest  extent  of  soundings  in  length  and 
breadth  in  the  known  world,"  larger  than  those  of  Newfound 
land  and  Great  Britain  together.  These  facts  as  to  the  extent 
of  these  fisheries  were  proven  by  the  actual  survey  of  the 
coast  but  better  still  by  the  actual  experience  of  the  fishermen 
themselves.  The  climate,  too,  was  favorable  for  the  taking  and 
the  preservation  of  the  fish.  It  is  not  so  cold  as  to  interfere 
with  the  catch  nor  yet  so  warm  as  to  prevent  them  being  pre 
served;  and  although  near  Sitka  the  constant  rains  prevent 
their  being  dried  in  the  sun,  they  can  be  easily  taken  to  curing 
stations,  as  is  done  on  the  Atlantic  coast.  An  abundant  market 
was  furnished  in  Washington,  California  and  Oregon  and  our 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  581 

country  eastward.  Su'mner  traced  the  rise  and  development  of 
the  fisheries  on  the  Atlantic  coast  and  predicted  that  those,  now 
purchased,  would  yet  rival  our  immense  interests  in  the  business 
on  our  eastern  shores. 

In  conclusion  Sumner  suggested  that  a  new  name  must  be 
furnished  our  new  possessions.  They  had  been  heretofore 
known  as  "  Russian  America "  or  "  Eussian  Possessions  in 
America."  Such  names  after  the  country  had  ceased  to  be 
long  to  Russia  would  be  obviously  improper.  He  therefore,  in 
looking  for  a  more  appropriate  name,  was  attracted  by  the 
designation  of  the  promontory  stretching  towards  the  Aleutian 
Islands  which  had  been  called  by  Captain  Cook,  "  Alaska."  It 
was  the  name  applied  by  the  natives  to  the  American  con 
tinent,  meaning  "  great  land."  Sumner  suggested  the  name 
for  the  whole  possession.  Mr.  Hilgard,  of  the  coast  survey, 
prepared  a  new  map  of  the  country.  It  was  to  appear  for  the 
first  time  with  the  pamphlet  edition  of  Sumner's  speech.  In 
a  letter  to  Sumner,  he  wrote :  "  As  this  edition  will  make  its 
first  appearance  appended  to  your  speech,  I  have  ventured 
to  put  on  it  the  name  Alaska,  proposed  by  you,  as  I  have 
no  doubt  it  will  be  generally  adopted."  It  has  been  universally 
adopted  and  has  ever  since  been  the  name  of  our  Arctic  pos 
sessions. 

I  have  thus  given  a  somewhat  extended  outline  of  Sumner's 
speech  to  enable  the  reader  to  see  something  of  its  real  character 
and  the  labor  he  gave  to  it.  It  was  a  marvel  of  research,  hap 
pily  arranged  and  clearly  expressed.  Until  it  was  published, 
we  had  no  compendious  treatment  of  the  subject.  Though  he 
was  obliged  to  grope  in  all  sorts  of  out-of-the-way  places  for 
information,  the  work  was  conscientiously  done.  It  affords  to 
day  one  of  the  best  and  most  useful  treatises,  on  the  re 
sources  of  the  country;  and  has  been  much  read  and  relied 
upon,  for  ready  information  on  the  subject.  When  the  question 
of  the  purchase  was  before  the  country  there  was  an  earnest  in 
quiry  for  such  information.  Congress  had  not  yet  voted  the 
money  to  pay  for  it,  the  country  was  badly  in  debt  and  bur 
dened  with  pensions  and  other  large  expenditures,  our  inheri 
tance  from  the  war.  There  was  rife  talk  of  repudiation.  The 
people  must  be  persuaded  that  the  proposition  of  purchase  had 
merit,  before  Congressmen  could  be  expected  to  vote  an  in 
crease  of  the  National  debt  for  this  purpose.  Sumner's  speech 
did  very  much  to  turn  the  tide  in  its  favor.  It  showed  by  an 
authority,  that  men  had  come  to  regard  with  confidence,  that 
the  property  was  more  than  worth  the  price,  and  that  it  would 
be  folly  for  our  nation  to  allow  the  opportunity,  to  possess  it, 


582  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to  escape.  That  Sumner  should  advocate  it  when  proposed  by 
President  Johnson  and  his  Secretary,  between  whom  on  gen 
eral  questions,  there  was  so  much  disagreement,  showed  his 
statesmanship.  With  him,  in  public  matters,  the  advocate  was 
nothing,  the  merit  of  the  proposition,  everything. 

Fessenden  moved  in  the  Senate  to  postpone  the  further 
consideration  of  the  treaty,  but  his  motion  was  voted  down. 
The  ratification  of  it  was  voted  by  the  Senate,  the  same  day 
that  Sumner  spoke,  by  a  vote  of  thirty-seven  to  two,  Fessenden 
and  Morrill  of  Vermont  voting  against  it.  The  money  to  pay 
for  it  was  not  voted  by  the  House  until  July,  18G8,  more  than 
a  year  later  and  then  only  after  an  acrimonious  debate.  Some 
feeling  was  shown  towards  the  President  and  his  Secretary  for 
having  proceeded  so  far  with  the  negotiation  in  secret,  without 
reserving  any  judgment  for  the  other  Departments  of  the  Gov 
ernment.  The  Secretary  felt  the  importance  of  the  treaty  so 
fully  that  he  hardly  intended  to  leave  it  where  Congress  could 
defeat  it  without  great  embarrassment.  This  did  contribute  to 
its  successful  termination.  But  it  was  the  powerful  influence  of 
Sumner,  that  gave  direction  to  public  sentiment,  on  the  subject, 
and  insured  its  success.  His  speech  was  published  in  full,  not 
withstanding  its  great  length,  in  the  Boston  Journal,  extracts 
from  it  were  published  in  other  dailies,  a  Russian  translation 
of  it  with  an  introduction  was  published  in  St.  Petersburg; 
and  it  was  widely  read  and  commented  on  in  influential  quar 
ters.  The  Secretary  of  State  subscribed  for  copies  of  the  pam 
phlet  edition  of  it,  printed  in  this  country,  out  of  funds  of  the 
State  Department,  and  distributed  them  to  Members  of  Con 
gress  and  the  public. 

Sumner's  caveat  against  indiscriminate  acquisitions  of  ter 
ritory,  contained  in  the  speech,  proved  to  be  well-timed.  Se- 
ward  had  a  strong  tendency  towards  territorial  aggrandizement. 
He  seriously  contemplated  the  purchase  of  the  island  of  St. 
Thomas,  one  of  the  West  Indies,  belonging  to  Denmark,  for 
$7,500,000.  Denmark  sent  a  special  agent,  General  Raasloff, 
to  this  country  to  promote  the  negotiations.  He  remained  in 
Washington  some  months  and  saw  Sumner  frequently  on  the 
subject,  but  Sumner  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  The 
island  is  an  unhealthy,  storm-swept  rock,  frequented  by  hurri 
canes  and  dotted  by  volcanoes,  altogether  of  little  value.  The 
negotiation,  though  persisted  in  till  Seward  went  out  of  office, 
was  a  dismal  failure.  He  had  also  cast  a  longing  eye  towards 
Mexico  and  the  Sandwich  Islands. 

The  acquisition  of  Alaska  was  a  complete  reversal  of  the 
policy  of  our  government.  Under  the  domination  of  slavery,  we 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  583 

had  made  repeated  acquisitions  of  territory  to  the  South  for  the 
purpose  of  increasing  its  influence  in  the  two  Houses  of  Con 
gress.  Prior  to  its  domination,  in  1803,  we  had  acquired  the 
Louisiana  Territory,  partly  North  and  partly  South.  But  after 
this,  all  our  acquisitions  had  been  in  the  South  until  now, 
Florida  in  1819,  Texas  in  1845,  parts  of  New  Mexico  and  Ari 
zona,  all  of  California,  Utah  and  Nevada  in  1848  and  still  other 
parts  of  New  Mexico  and  Arizona  by  the  Gadsden  Purchase  in 
1853.  The  purchase  of  Alaska  therefore  was  a  complete  de 
parture  from  the  pro-slavery  policy  of  the  Government  and 
turned  the  eyes  of  the  Nation  northward.  Its  acquisition,  how 
ever,  was  attended  with  some  regrets  at  the  blundering  of  the 
same  period  that  had  lost  us  British  Columbia.  It  would 
have  given  us  an  unbroken  Pacific  coast-line  from  Lower  Cali 
fornia  to  the  Arctic  Ocean. 


CHAPTER  XXXV 


BOSTON — NEW  HOME 
IN  WASHINGTON HABITS VISITORS 

THE  preparation,  for  publication,  of  his  speech  on  Alaska,  oc 
cupied  Sumner's  time  between  the  adjournment  of  the  Execu 
tive  session  of  the  Senate  in  April  and  the  Extra  session  of 
Congress  in  July.  After  the  close  of  this  session  Sumner  went 
to  Boston.  But  the  time  hung  heavily  on  his  hands.  He  was 
without  a  home  and  a  companion.  His  mother's  house  where  he 
had  so  long  enjoyed  the  quiet  of  his  vacation  was  closed,  to  be 
open  to  him  no  more.  The  two  previous  summers  it  had  been 
occupied  by  him  and  his  wife  as  their  home,  though  part  of  each 
they  were  absent  from  it, — at  Newport  together,  part  of  the 
first,  and  she,  at  Lenox,  the  second.  But  the  sequel  of  their 
married  life  was  a  sad  one.  She  was  not  happy  and  as  he  pre 
dicted  there  could,  therefore,  be  no  happiness  in  the  union  for 
him.  The  first  winter  passed  in  the  routine  of  Washington  life 
and  without  incident,  so  far  as  the  public  knew.  After  the  close 
of  the  session  in  Washington,  they  returned  in  June  to  their 
home  in  Boston.  During  the  same  month  she  went  to  Lenox, — 
and  so  they  parted — never  to  meet  again.  The  friends  of  both 
parties  continued  to  hope,  for  some  time,  that  a  reconciliation 
would  be  had,  but  it  never  came.  Some  years  later  he  procured 
a  divorce.  Those  in  position  best  able  to  know  the  facts 
acquitted  him  of  any  fault.  Mr.  Hooper,  at  whose  house  they 
had  met,  and  who  had  stood  towards  her  as  a  father,  continued 
Sumner's  friend  to  the  end,  was  present  with  kind  offices  at  his 
last  sickness  and  death,  and  to  him  were  addressed  in  friendly 
recognition  his  last  words. 

The  details  of  the  separation,  each  side  with  equal  good  taste, 
withheld  from  the  public.  The  real  cause  for  the  separation, 
however,  lay  in  the  disparity  of  their  ages.  It  is  seldom  that 
a  union  is  happy  where  such  a  disparity  exists.  He  had  become 
engrossed  in  public  affairs.  With  an  industry  rarely  equalled, 
he  had  given  his  undivided  attention  to  the  duties  of  his  office ; 
what  is  known  as  society  was  given  little  of  his  time.  It  was 
too  late  to  change  the  habits  which  had  grown  upon  him  with 
the  years.  They  were  now  a  part  of  himself.  Her  life  had 

584 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  585 

been  cast  in  an  entirely  different  mould  and  she  could  not  fall 
readily  into  the  habits  of  one  so  many  years  her  senior.  The 
place  of  the  wife  of  a  man  of  his  prominence  with  its  hard 
round  of  social  functions  at  Washington  and  Boston,  would 
have  been  no  easy  place  for  one  much  older  and  who  had  grown 
into  it  with  his  growth. 

This  brief  statement  covering  a  period  of  eight  months, 
relates  all  the  public  ever  knew  of  the  story  of  Sumner's  married 
life.  But  it  was  a  relation  that  tinged  the  remainder  of  his 
days.  The  thought  came  sadly  to  him  that  he  was  never  to 
know  again  the  comforts  of  a  home.  As  the  years  went  by,  the 
hard  troublous  days  brought  a  struggle  with  Johnson  and  then 
another  with  Grant,  with  loss  of  friends,  with  sickness  and  age 
and  there  came  too  a  feeling  of  loneliness,  growing  upon  him 
to  the  end.  On  all  sides  there  was  respect  and  admiration, 
amounting  almost  to  veneration,  but  when  the  time  had  come 
when  he  needed  the  affection  and  tenderness  of  a  home,  there 
was  none.  He  stood  like  the  last  oak.  If  he  found  help,  it 
must  be  at  the  hands  of  men  and  of  strangers,  often  good 
enough  and  faithful  enough  too  of  its  kind,  but  who  that  has 
spent  much  of  his  life  in  hotels  and  boarding-houses  has 
not  grown  tired  of  the  kind.  Of  womanly  tenderness  and  sym 
pathetic  home  confidence  and  companionship  he  found  none. 
It  seemed  a  poor  lot ;  and  by  the  hard  work  and  the  good  he  had 
done  he  felt  he  deserved  a  better  one. 

And  so  his  married  life  ended.  But  their  separation  had 
not  before  come  so  sadly  to  him  as  now.  During  the  sessions 
of  Congress,  crowded  with  work  and  much  in  the  society  of  his 
fellow-Senators,  his  mind  had  been  withdrawn  from  it.  But 
with  the  work  of  the  sessions  done  and  the  time  of  vacation  at 
hand,  away  from  Washington  and  its  excitement,  among  the 
quieter  days  at  Boston,  it  came  heavily  upon  him.  It  was 
publicly  known  and  talked  about.  He  sought  a  respite  from 
the  thought  of  it,  in  his  never-failing  solace,  books.  Books  are 
friends  that  never  fail  us.  In  the  preparation  of  his  speech  on 
Alaska,  his  thoughts  had  been  turned  to  the  widening  prospect 
of  his  country.  The  vision  that  it  opened  to  him  was  a  pleasant 
one  and  he  found  easy  diversion  in  pursuing  the  subject. 

He  turned  his  attention  to  the  preparation  of  an  article  on 
"  Prophetic  Voices  Concerning  America,"  which  was  published 
in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  for  September,  1867.  It  afforded  him 
a  wide  field  for  reading,  groping  among  old,  and  almost  for 
gotten,  authors,  and  in  curious  places,  in  literature.  It  was  a 
kind  of  diversion  he  enjoyed  and  was  like  his  study  of  en 
gravings,  that  had  solaced  his  thoughts,  while  in  the  hands  of 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SU LINER 

his  physician  and  suffering  from  the  assault  by  Brooks.  The 
monograph  was  afterwards  amplified,  with  a  view  to  separate 
publication,  at  the  approach  of  our  Centennial  Celebration,  in 
1876.  It  now  occupies  one  hundred  and  eighty  pages  of  his 
works. 

It  is  a  curious  collection  of  prophecies,  made  at  different 
times,  by  many  men,  concerning  the  future  of  America.  It  is 
arranged  in  heads,  under  the  name  of  each  of  the  authors 
quoted,  and  contains  as  introductory  to  the  prophetic  matter 
quoted,  a  brief  biographical  sketch  of  the  author,  whose  predic 
tion  is  given  with  comments  on  the  prophecy,  and  an  extended 
introduction  and  conclusion  to  the  whole  monograph  by  Suin- 
ner.  In  the  opening  sentence,  he  pronounces  the  discovery  of 
America  by  Columbus,  "  the  greatest  event  of  secular  history." 
In  numerous  places  crops  out  the  support  of  the  prediction  he 
had  ventured,  in  his  speech  on  Alaska,  that  some  day  Canada 
would  be  part  of  the  United  States  and  that  the  whole  continent 
of  North  America  was  destined  to  become  the  home  of  one 
people.  Turgot,  the  French  philosopher  and  statesman,  wrote 
in  1750,  predicting  our  Eevolution:  "Colonies  are  like  fruits, 
which  hold  to  the  tree  only  until  their  maturity;  when  suffi 
cient  for  themselves  they  did  that  which  Carthage  afterwards 
did, — that  which  some  day  America  will  do."  Sumner  added, 
"  At  the  time  Turgot  wrote,  Canada  was  a  French  possession ; 
but  his  words  are  as  applicable  to  this  colony  as  to  the  United 
States.  When  will  the  fruit  be  ripe?"  He  quoted  John 
Adams,  De  Tocqueville  and  Cobden  in  support  of  his  prophecy ; 
and  criticised  Jefferson  and  Daniel  Webster  for  a  narrow  view 
of  our  destiny,  they  believing  that  an  independent  nation  would 
some  day  occupy  the  shores  of  the  Pacific  where  are  now  the 
States  of  California,  Oregon  and  Washington. 

Sumner  received  numerous  congratulations  on  this  mono 
graph.  Men  wondered  that,  with  the  many  other  demands  on 
him,  he  could  still  find  time  for  such  work  and  they  were  still 
further  surprised,  when  he  undertook  it,  that  he  could  do  it  so 
well.  His  industry  and  the  resources  of  his  mind  seemed 
remarkable  to  his  friends.  Edmunds,  remembering  the  caustic 
characterization  of  himself  by  Sumner,  in  the  interview  in  the 
Boston  Advertiser  humorously  wrote  him  on  reading  the 
monograph,  that  he  hoped  he  would  not  hasten  the  irresistible 
attraction  prophecy  but  bring  his  "  obstructiveness  and  tech 
nicality  "  to  bear  against  the  purchase  of  St.  Thomas  and  Cuba. 
Edmunds  was  in  favor  of  the  acquisition  of  British  Columbia. 

When  Sumner  had  finished  his  monograph  and  handed  it  to 
the  magazine,  he  plunged  into  the  preparation  of  a  lecture  on 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  58? 

"  The  Nation  ".  Its  preparation,  he  hoped,  would  banish  un 
pleasant  thoughts  and  furnish  congenial  employment  for  the 
balance  of  the  recess.  He  had  never  stood  before  a  Western  au 
dience.  He  had  never  been  in  the  West  but  once  and  then  with 
little  opportunity  to  mingle  with  her  people.  He  wished  to  see 
more  of  this  section,  that  in  later  years  had  added  so  much  to 
the  strength  and  greatness  of  the  Republic.  He  had  been  fore 
most  in  defending  her  rights  and  keeping  her  free.  A  lecturing 
tour  would  furnish  him  an  excuse  for  going,  an  opportunity  for 
seeing,  and  likewise  take  him  away  from  Boston  for  a  time. 
He  had  thoughts  too  of  establishing  a  home  for  himself  in 
Washington,  but  doubted  his  ability  to  meet  the  expense  of 
such  an  establishment.  The  income  of  his  lectures  would  aid 
this  plan.  It  would  do  good,  he  hoped,  to  call  popular  attention 
to  the  nature  of  our  Government  and  enforce  the  theory  of  its 
National  character  instead  of  the  narrow  construction  placed 
upon  it  by  the  advocates  of  State  Rights. 

The  purpose  of  Sumner's  lecture  was  to  combat  the  idea, 
advanced  by  John  C.  Calhoun  and  the  Nullifiers  of  1832  and 
the  State  Rights  advocates  of  the  South,  that  we  are  a  union  of 
Sovereign  States  and  not  a  Nation,  that  this  Union  is  simply 
a  league  entered  into  by  the  States,  which  retain,  however,  their 
sovereign  character,  that  they  can  withdraw  from  it  at  pleasure 
and  re-established  themselves  in  new  relations  at  will,  that  a  few 
rights  are  specifically  granted  to  the  general  Government,  that 
all  others  are  reserved  by  the  States,  including  the  right  to 
establish  slavery,  fix  the  right  to  vote,  etc.  This  theory  had 
culminated  in  the  Rebellion.  Sunnier  insisted,  to  the  contrary, 
that  we  were  a  Nation,  that  though  many  things  are  necessarily 
left  to  local  self-government  in  the  hands  of  the  States,  the 
great  principles  of  unity  and  Human  Rights  are  under  the 
control  of  the  central  Government.  This  had  been  a  con 
trolling  principle  of  Simmer's  public  life.  He  believed  this 
theory,  as  important  to  be  kept  in  mind  now  as  ever,  that 
though  the  war  was  over  and  this  construction  had  prevailed, 
there  was  danger  of  its  being  forgotten.  He  thought  the  Nation 
should  shun  those  pestilent  persons,  who  would  carry  trifles  to 
the  highest  magistrate,  but  should  hold  firmly  to  the  great  car 
dinal  principles  of  human  rights,  that  it  should  insure  equality, 
abolish  all  discriminations  among  citizens  and  refuse  to  tolerate 
the  preposterous  pretension  that  color,  whether  of  the  hair  or 
of  the  skin,  or  any  other  unchangeable  circumstance  of  natural 
condition,  may  be  made  a  qualification  of  the  voter.  The  essen 
tial  condition  of  our  National  life,  he  insisted,  should  be,  "  one 
sovereignty,  one  citizenship,  one  people  ".  The  Rebellion  had 


588  LIF®  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

proceeded  from  hostility  to  the  principle  of  equality  of  all  men, 
therefore  this  principle  must  now  be  made  the  supreme  law, 
that  we  could  not  trample  out  the  Rebellion,  till  the  principle 
that  produced  it  was  trampled  out  also. 

Sumner  cited  examples  of  the  perils  of  a  nation,  composed 
of  separate,  independent  communities ;  disunited  Italy,  a  prey 
to  petty  princes  and  petty  republics,  tempting  the  foreigner  by 
her  "  fatal  gift "  of  beauty,  till  reunited  by  Garibaldi ;  Ger 
many,  with  her  magnificent  territory  stretching  from  the  Baltic 
to  the  Adriatic  and  the  Alps,  with  great  rivers,  one  language, 
one  intellectual  life  and  one  name,  yet  only  a  patchwork  of 
States,  full  of  extravagant  pretensions  and  discordant  egotism, 
each  with  its  own  custom  house,  stifling  the  aspiration  for  na 
tional  unity,  sapping  the  national  life  with  perpetual  war  and 
with  strife,  till  the  memorable  efforts  of  Bismarck  for  unity; 
France  divided  into  great  provinces,  Normandy,  Brittany, 
Burgundy,  Provence,  Languedoc  and  Gascony,  ruled  over  by 
quarrelsome  barons,  threatening  nullification  and  sharing  tur 
bulence,  till  the  lilies  of  a  united  nation  floated  over  her  proud 
and  victorious  people.  The  Colonies  had  passed  through  a  sim 
ilar  experience  and  the  present  union  was  formed  to  prevent  a 
continuance  of  its  evils.  Our  Constitution  demonstrates  our 
national  character.  Its  preamble  commences  "  We,  the  people," 
it  guarantees  to  all  the  States  a  republican  form  of  government, 
it  asserts  its  supremacy  over  the  constitution  and  laws  of  every 
State,  and  it  was  opposed  and  vindicated  at  the  time  of  its 
adoption  as  creating  a  National  Government.  He  argued  that 
our  National  character  was  also  shown  by  the  flag  with  its  alter 
nate  stripes  of  red  and  white,  with  its  stars  on  a  field  of  blue ; 
and  by  the  configuration  of  the  country  chosen  to  be  united, 
from  ocean  to  ocean,  from  the  Lakes  to  the  Gulf,  joined  by  one 
great  network  of  rivers,  binding  all  together. 

The  delivery  of  this  lecture  occupied  his  time  from  October 
seventh,  when  it  was  delivered  first,  at  Pontiac,  Michigan, 
until  November  nineteenth,  when  it  was  delivered  in  New 
.York.  It  was  repeated,  between  these  dates,  twenty-six  times, 
read  during  the  first  part,  and  without  notes  the  last  part  of  the 
time.  His  appointments  were  in  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Illinois, 
Iowa,  Missouri  and  Ohio,  in  the  West;  and  in  Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  Maine  and  New  York,  in  the  East. 

At  the  close  of  this  lecture  tour,  he  plunged  into  the  work  of 
removing  from  the  old  home,  in  Hancock  Street,  Boston.  It 
was  a  sad  task  to  leave  the  home  of  his  childhood,  ren 
dered  still  sadder  by  thoughts  of  the  domestic  calamity  that 
finally  prompted  it.  To  Longfellow  he  revealed  his  feeling  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  589 

despondency,  when  he  declared  that  from  this  home  he  had 
buried  his  father  and  mother,  a  brother  and  three  sisters  and 
that  he  was  now  leaving  it,  "  the  deadest  of  them  all."  With 
a  heavy  heart  the  family  papers  were  sorted  and  the  furniture 
was  wrapped  and  the  accumulation  of  his  own  books  and  casts 
and  pictures  were  packed,  preparatory  to  vacating  for  the  new 
occupant.  How  the  memories  of  dear  ones,  all  gone,  gathered 
around  each  familiar  object  and  looked  at  him,  out  of  each 
well-known  corner!  It  seemed  like  desecration,  to  ask  these 
pictures  to  leave  their  accustomed  places,  and  irreverence  to  the 
dead.  How  the  thoughts  of  childhood  and  mother  and  sister 
seemed  to  linger  still  about  the  dear,  deserted  place !  The 
chill  November  days  without,  were  no  more  dreary  than  his 
thoughts  within.  At  last  the  sad  work  was  finished  and  by  the 
beginning  of  December  he  was  in  Washington  ready  to  move 
into  his  new  home. 

He  had  purchased,  for  thirty  thousand  dollars,  a  house  on  La 
fayette  Square  and  only  across  that  square  from  the  White 
House  grounds.  It  was  in  the  best  district  in  Washington, 
near  to  and  in  plain  view  of  the  Executive  Mansion,  not  far 
from  the  Departments  and  the  Embassies,  fronting  on  a  beauti 
ful  park,  one  of  the  largest  in  the  city,  on  a  corner  where  sun 
light  and  fresh  air  were  abundant  and  within  easy  walk,  of  a 
dozen  squares,  down  Pennsylvania  Avenue,  to  the  Capitol.  The 
house  was  commodious,  on  the  first  floor  a  drawing-room, 
library  and  dining-room,  on  the  second  a  guest-chamber  and  his 
bedroom  with  his  study  between.  These  rooms  were  all  large, 
airy  and  well-lighted.  Below  and  above  these  floors  were  the 
kitchen  and  servants'  quarters.  It  was  in  his  study  on  the 
second  floor,  with  his  windows  looking  out  across  the  Park  to 
the  White  House  that  he  spent  most  of  his  time  and  ordinarily 
entertained  his  friends.  Here  he  worked  and  read  and  wrote. 
A  door  opened  from  one  end  of  it  into  his  own  bedroom  and, 
from  the  other,  it  opened  into  his  guest  chamber.  This  house 
continued  to  be  his  home  for  the  remainder  of  his  life;  and  it 
was  here  he  died. 

He  dreaded  the  experiment  of  housekeeping.  He  feared  it 
was  beyond  his  means,  though  by  the  death  of  his  mother,  his 
fortune  had  now  been  increased  to  one  hundred  thousand 
dollars.  Forty  thousand  dollars  of  this  sum,  were  his  previous 
accumulations.  But  with  the  large  expenditure  for  his  house 
and  the  further  amount  that  would  be  necessary  to  furnish  it, 
together  with  the  expense  of  maintaining  it,  with  hired  help 
exclusively,  being  himself  without  experience  to  aid  him  in  such 


590  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

matters,  he  feared  that  his  remaining  income  would  not  be 
equal  to  the  drain  upon  it. 

On  the  other  hand  he  was  tired  of  boarding-houses  and 
longed  for  greater  freedom  and  a  little  more  of  the  feeling  of 
proprietorship,  in  his  surroundings.  Though  avoiding  parties, 
he  was  entertained  much.  His  long  residence  at  the  Capitol 
and  his  leadership  in  the  Senate,  called  him  into  prominence 
socially.  His  chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Rela 
tions  and  his  extensive  foreign  acquaintance  brought  him 
into  social  relations  with  the  foreign  embassies.  He  enjoyed 
the  social  life  of  the  Capitol.  He  loved  the  companionship  of 
distinguished  men  and  liked  to  be  upon  terms  of  intimacy  with 
them;  and  at  the  social  board,  no  other  voice  entered  more  fully 
and  more  heartily  into  the  life  of  the  occasion.  Indeed  he 
was  criticised  for  having  somewhat  of  the  disposition  of 
Macaulay  to  override  others  in  conversation.  He  was  full  of 
anecdotes  of  persons  and  places,  which  he  loved  to  recall  to 
himself  and  others  and,  while  not  a  wit,  his  ready  and  hearty 
laugh  responded  freely  to  the  sallies  of  others.  It  was  in  such 
things  and  his  books,  that  he  found  his  truest  recreation.  His 
friends,  knowing  this,  urged  the  change  upon  him.  It  would 
relieve  the  solitude  of  his  life  and  enable  him  to  give,  as  well  as 
receive  entertainment. 

He  usually,  while  occupying  this  house,  arose  about  seven 
each  morning,  breakfasted  at  8 :  30  and  dined  at  5  :30.  These 
were  his  only  times  of  eating.  He  occupied  himself  while  at 
the  morning  meal,  with  a  hurried  examination  of  his  mail. 
This  meal  being  over,  his  letters  were  answered  and  others 
written,  with  the  aid  of  his  secretaries,  clerks  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  which  he,  as  Chairman,  selected. 
All  of  them  were  at  the  time  young  men  and  between  them 
and  Sumner  there  then  and  ever  after  existed  a  warm  and 
affectionate  relation.  The  balance  of  the  forenoon  was  con 
sumed  in  the  examination  of  questions  pending  before  the 
Senate,  with  persons  who  called  to  see  him,  the  work  of  Com 
mittees,  etc. ;  the  afternoons  were  occupied  with  the  sessions 
of  the  Senate.  After  dinner  he  drove;  and  his  evenings  were 
spent  at  his  home,  usually  at  work  on  his  speeches  or  other  work 
of  his  office.  Eleven  hours  he  counted  a  day's  work,  but  they 
were  often  prolonged  beyond  that.  His  regular  hour  of  retiring 
was  at  midnight,  but  when  pressed,  he  would  remain  up  and  at 
work  later,  sometimes  all  night,  substituting  a  change  of  linen 
for  the  refreshment  of  a  night's  rest. 

He  had  now  an  opportunity  to  gratify  his  taste  for  paintings, 
engravings  and  curios  and  during  the  remainder  of  his  life  he 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  591 

bought  them  freely.  The  walls  of  the  rooms  and  halls  of  his 
home  were  filled  with  them.  To  one  who  expressed  astonish 
ment  that  he  resorted  to  the  popular  horse-cars  of  the  day, 
instead  of  keeping  a  carriage  and  horses  of  his  own,  he  replied 
that  if  he  did  that,  he  could  not  enjoy  these  things,  pointing  to 
his  pictures  and  curios,  adding  that  they  were  a  part  of  his  life, 
while  he  could  dispense  with  the  other.  Here  he  kept  his  col 
lection  of  rare  and  valuable  books.  It  was  a  delight  for  him 
to  go  from  one  to  another  of  these  treasures  and  exhibit  them 
to  his  friends,  dwelling  upon  the  life  of  an  artist  or  the  merits 
of  a  picture  or  the  interesting  history  of  some  rare  book,  John 
Bunyan's  Bible,  an  exercise  book  that  the  poet  Dryden  had 
studied  when  a  boy  at  school,  a  tragedy  of  Voltaire,  and  Pope's 
"  Essay  on  Man/'  each  with  the  author's  own  corrections  for 
new  editions,  a  book  which  had  belonged  to  England's  Queen, 
Anne  Boleyn,  another  of  her  daughter,  Queen  Elizabeth,  still 
another  of  the  great  Napoleon  and,  most  precious  of  all,  the 
Album  kept  at  Geneva,  Switzerland,  by  a  Neapolitan  nobleman, 
in  which  were  secured  the  autographs  of  distinguished  visitors 
to  that  city,  among  the  rest  that  of  England's  great  Earl  of 
Stratford  and  another  of  John  Milton  under  a  couplet  from  his 
Comus : 

— "if  virtue  feeble  were 
Heaven  itself  would  stoope  to  her." 

While  occupying  this  house,  Sumner  seldom  dined  alone.  He 
would  bring  a  friend  with  him  from  the  House  or  the  Senate, 
or  a  member  of  the  diplomatic  corps,  or  some  visitor  or  con 
stituent,  who  happened  to  be  in  Washington.  Here  George 
William  Curtis  dined  almost  daily,  when  in  Washington,  as 
Chairman  of  the  Civil  Service  Commission.  Here  Charles 
Dickens  met  Stanton  at  dinner  and  heard  him  and  his  host 
recount  their  experiences,  on  the  night  of  the  assassination  of 
Lincoln,  as  well  as  Stanton's  confession,  how  on  many  nights 
of  anxiety  during  the  Eebellion  he  had  gone  to  bed,  with  one 
of  Dickens'  novels  under  his  pillow,  so  that  if  the  hours  proved 
sleepless,  he  could  drive  away  the  thoughts  of  his  work,  with 
the  absorption  of  his  book.  Here  William  M.  Evarts  came  late 
to  dinner  on  a  Sunday,  during  his  preparation  for  the  trial  of 
the  Impeachment  of  Andrew  Johnson,  and  apologized,  for  his 
tardiness  and  such  work  on  that  day,  by  the  scriptural  inquiry : 
"  which  of  you  shall  have  an  ass  *  *  *  fallen  into  a  pit  and 
will  not  straightway  pull  him  out  on  the  Sabbath  day  ?  " 


CHAPTER  XXXVI 

THE     IMPEACHMENT     OF     PRESIDENT     JOHNSON THE     EVENTS 

THAT   LED   UP   TO    IT SUMNER   ARGUES    THAT   WADE    QUAL 
IFIED  TO  SIT THAT  CHIEF  JUSTICE  CANNOT  RULE  OR  VOTE 

OPINION  ON    THE   CASE 

THE  session  of  Congress  of  1867-8  is  memorable  for  the  im 
peachment  of  President  Johnson.  No  other  attempt  has  ever 
been  made  to  impeach  a  President.  The  events  that  have  been 
narrated  in  these  pages,  show  how  Congress  was  provoked  to 
this  step.  The  reader  will  remember  his  numerous  vetoes;  his 
hostility  to  Reconstruction  Laws;  his  wholesale  removals  from 
office,  to  make  room  for  his  friends,  that  prompted  the  Tenure 
of  Office  Law ;  his  pronounced  sympathy  for  the  South ;  his  in 
temperate  public  speeches,  attacking  Congress  before  the  people 
as  an  unconstitutional  body,  because  not  admitting  to  member 
ship,  persons  returned  by  the  States  lately  in  rebellion,  his 
coarse  references  to  some  of  its  Members  and  even  to  private 
citizens,  who  were  prominent  in  work  for  the  Freedmen.  Few 
men  would  have  had  the  temerity  to  continue  the  hopeless  fight, 
as  he  did,  against  a  defiant  majority,  in  both  Houses,  that  stood 
ready  with  a  two-thirds  vote  to  pass  measures  over  his  vetoes. 
Still  fewer  would  have  continued  it,  after  the  overwhelming 
defeat  which  his  "policy"  sustained,  in  the  popular  election 
of  1866.  The  patience  of  no  Congress  was  ever  put  to  a  severer 
test. 

Talk  of  impeachment  had  been  rife  for  many  months  in 
Congressional  circles.  Sumner  favored  it.  But  calmer  coun 
sels  had  prevailed.  On  January  seventh,  1867,  James  M. 
Ashley,  a  Representative  from  Ohio,  presented,  in  the  House, 
formal  charges  against  the  President  of  a  corrupt  use  of  the 
appointing,  and  pardoning  and  veto  powers  and  of  corruptly 
interfering  with  elections.  The  charges  were  referred  to  the 
Judiciary  Committee  of  which  James  F.  Wilson,  of  Iowa,  was 
chairman.  Evidence  was  taken  by  this  Committee,  not  enough 
to  justify  a  final  report,  but  enough  to  warrant,  at  the  expira 
tion  of  the  Congress,  a  majority  report  recommending  a  fur 
ther  investigation  of  the  charges  by  the  succeeding  Congress. 
Five  days  later,  in  the  next  Congress,  Ashley  moved  that  the 
Judiciary  Committee  be  directed  to  continue  the  investigation. 

592 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  593 

The  motion  carried  by  a  small  majority.  The  Committee  by  a 
vote  of  five  to  four  afterwards  recommended  impeachment. 
The  debate,  on  this  report,  was  limited  to  a  speech  on  each  side, 
Boutwell  for,  and  Wilson,  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee, 
against.  Both  were  Eepublicans.  The  vote  was  taken  the  day 
after  the  conclusion  of  the  debate  and  the  recommendation  of 
the  Committee  was  defeated  by  the  overwhelming  vote  of  fifty- 
seven  to  one  hundred  and  eight.  Only  Republicans  voted  for  it. 
With  the  Democrats  who  voted  against  it,  there  were  sixty-five 
Republicans,  among  them  Allison,  Bingham,  Blaine,  Garfield, 
Wilson  and  the  four  Washburns. 

From  these  names  and  this  vote,  it  will  be  seen  that  im 
peachment  was  not  yet  popular.  The  conservative  men  of  the 
country,  both  in  and  out  of  Congress,  were  generally  against 
it.  Even  the  Republicans  that  voted  against  it  did  not  pretend 
to  be  satisfied  with  the  course  of  the  President,  but  their  feeling 
was  that  his  conduct  did  not  justify  such  extreme  punishment. 
The  country,  generally,  after  the  years  of  turmoil  it  had  wit 
nessed,  hoped  for  peace  and  that  business  interests  would 
be  spared  this  new  disturbance.  But  there  were  determined 
men,  of  large  experience  and  great  ability,  among  its  ad 
vocates;  Boutwell,  Butler,  Kelley,  Logan,  Lawrence,  Schenck 
and  Thaddeus  Stevens.  Among  them,  there  was  anger  and 
bitterness  at  its  defeat.  While  they  were  defeated,  they  were 
not  discouraged,  but  were  determined  to  bide  their  time,  feeling 
that  their  opportunity  might  yet  come.  And  it  did  come  soon. 
There  had  been  trouble  between  the  President  and  his 
Cabinet.  Very  early,  some  of  the  members  found  themselves 
unable  to  agree  with  him.  Dennison,  Postmaster-General; 
Speed,  Attorney-General;  Harlan,  of  the  Interior  Depart 
ment,  against  the  advice  of  friends  who  urged  them  to  retain 
their  offices  so  as  to  limit  his  power  and  prevent  his  use  of  the 
patronage,  had,  one  after  another,  offered  their  resignations. 
\  The  resignations  were  promptly  accepted  and  willing  servants 
'  of  the  President  at  once  took  their  places.  Stanton,  of  the  War 
Department,  was  likewise  persona  non  grata  to  the  President, 
but  was  of  a  different  disposition  from  the  others,  and  refused 
to  take  the  frequent  hints  given  him  to  resign.  At  last  the 
President,  on  August  fifth,  18G7,  wrote  Stanton:  "Public  con 
siderations,  of  a  high  character,  constrain  me  to  say  that  your 
resignation,  as  Secretary  of  War,  will  be  accepted/7  Stanton 
as  tartly  answered :  "  I  have  the  honor  to  say  that  public  con 
siderations,  of  a  high  character,  which  alone  have  induced  me 
to  continue  at  the  head  of  this  Department,  constrain  me  not  to 
resign  the  Secretaryship  of  War,  before  the  next  meeting  of 


594  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Congress/'  On  the  twelfth,  he  was  suspended  and  directed  to 
turn  over  the  office  to  General  Grant,  who  was  appointed 
Secretary  ad  interim.  Stanton  yielded,  but  protested,  in  writ 
ing,  that  he  submitted  "  under  protest,  to  superior  force." 

The  Tenure  of  Office  Law  required  the  President  to  commu 
nicate  this  suspension,  with  his  reasons  for  it,  to  the  Senate, 
within  twenty  days  after  its  next  meeting.  This  he  did  on 
December  twelfth,  1867,  just  five  days  after  the  House  had 
voted  down  the  resolution  of  impeachment.  The  Senate,  on 
January  thirteenth,  1868,  refused  to  concur  in  the  suspension. 
General  Grant  upon  receiving  notice  of  this  action  of  the 
Senate,  promptly  vacated  the  office  and  Stanton  as  promptly 
resumed  it.  The  President  hoped  that  Grant  would  retain  the 
office,  notwithstanding  the  action  of  the  Senate,  till  the  con 
stitutionality  of  the  Tenure  of  Office  Law  could  be  tested,  in  the 
courts,  by  a  suit  for  his  removal.  Grant  had  no  thought  of 
compromising  himself  in  any  such  manner.  His  prompt  vaca 
tion  displeased  the  President  and  angry  letters  were  exchanged, 
which  left  them  enemies  for  life. 

Stanton  was  now  back  in  office.  But  the  controversy  was  not 
ended.  On  the  twenty-first  day  of  February,  1868,  the  Presi 
dent  removed  him,  and  appointed  Lorenzo  Thomas,  Secretary 
ad  interim  and  on  the  same  day  notified  the  Senate  of  his 
action.  Sumner  had  all  the  time  watched  the  struggle  with 
increasing  interest.  His  experience  with  the  President 
privately  on  his  accession  to  the  office,  when  he  had  tried  to 
keep  him  firm  for  the  equal  rights  of  the  freedmen;  and  later, 
when  in  the  Senate,  he  had  sought  to  prevent  him  squandering 
the  hard-earned  fruits  of  the  war,  by  restoring  those  lately  in 
rebellion  to  power,  without  any  changed  conditions;  and  to 
defeat  his  wholesale  removal  of  loyal  men  from  office,  to  make 
places  for  his  friends,  had  made  Sumner  impatient  with  him. 
Sumner  wrote  Stanton  a  note,  in  pencil,  from  his  seat  in  the 
Senate,  with  the  single  word  "  stick,"  in  the  body  of  it.  The 
note  came  afterwards  into  the  possession  of  Ben  Perley  Poore 
and  was  sold  at  auction,  in  1888,  to  a  dealer  in  autographs. 
It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add  that  Stanton  did  "  stick." 

The  Senate  was  surprised  and  indignant  at  the  action  of  the 
President  and  promptly  passed  a  resolution  that  he  had  no 
power  to  make  the  removal.  It  was  just  here  that  the  real  con 
troversy  in  the  impeachment  proceedings  arose;  the  Presi 
dent's  friends  claimed  that  he  had.  The  question  depended 
upon  the  construction  to  be  given  the  Tenure  of  Office  Law. 
The  same  day  that  the  Senate  angrily  passed  this  resolution,  a 
second  resolution  of  impeachment  was  offered,  in  the  House, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  595 

and  it  was  at  once  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Reconstruc 
tion,  of  which  Thaddeus  Stevens  was  chairman.  The  House 
then  adjourned. 

Little  doubt  remained  of  what  would  be  the  fate  of  the 
resolution,  in  the  hands  of  a  committee,  thus  officered,  and 
which  had  experienced  so  much  trouble  with  the  President. 
The  next  day  it  was  reported  back,  with  the  recommendation 
that  it  pass,  and  that  the  question  be  taken  without  debate. 

But  the  Members  were  in  no  humor  to  pass  such  a  measure, 
without  allowing  expression  to  their  pent  up  feelings.  An 
angry  debate  followed  in  which  more  speakers  addressed  the 
House  than  ever  before,  in  a  single  day.  The  expressions 
upon  each  side  were  bitter  in  the  extreme  and  fill  more  than 
two  hundred  of  the  large  and  closely  printed  columns  of  the 
Congressional  Globe.  Several  Democrats,  perhaps  appreciating 
the  ludicrous  exhibition  of  wrath,  by  the  Republicans,  tried  to 
have  Washington's  Farewell  Address,  full  of  counsels  of 
moderation  and  of  peace  and  good  will  to  his  countrymen,  read, 
but  unable  to  succeed  in  this,  one  of  them  obtained  leave  to 
print  it  with  his  remarks,  in  the  Globe;  and  there  it  stands 
to-day  among  the  records  of  that  day's  angry  utterances. 
At  the  close  of  the  debate,  the  vote  was  taken  and  every  Repub 
lican,  that  voted,  was  for  impeachment  and  every  Democrat 
was  against  it.  One  Democrat  and  a  few  Republicans  did  not 
vote.  There  were  one  hundred  and  twenty-six  votes  for  im 
peachment  and  only  forty-seven  against  it. 

Thaddeus  Stevens  and  John  A.  Bingham  were  appointed  to 
notify  the  Senate  of  the  action  of  the  House.  With  five  other 
members,  they  were  also  appointed  to  draw  up  Articles  of  Im 
peachment  and  with  Boutwell,  Wilson,  Butler,  Williams  and 
Logan  they  were  made  Managers  to  present  the  case  on  behalf 
of  the  House  to  the  Senate.  In  the  choice  of  Managers,  John 
A.  Bingham  received  the  highest  number  of  votes  and  thereby 
became  chairman  of  the  board.  Henry  Stanberry,  the  Attorney- 
General,  William  M.  Evarts,  of  New  York,  Benj.  R.  Curtis,  of 
Boston,  William  S.  Groesbeck,  of  Cincinnati,  and  T.  A.  R. 
Nelson,  of  Tennessee,  represented  the  President. 

On  the  fourth  day  of  March,  attended  by  the  House,  the 
Managers  appeared,  at  the  bar  of  the  Senate,  and  the  chairman, 
Bingham,  read  the  articles  of  impeachment.  On  the  two  suc 
ceeding  days  the  oath  was  administered  to  the  Chief  Justice 
and  Senators,  rules  of  procedure  were  adopted  and  a  summons 
was  ordered  to  be  issued  to  the  President,  to  appear  and  answer 
the  charges,  returnable  on  the  thirteenth  day  of  March. 

When  the  name  of  Senator  Wade  was  called  to  receive  the 


596  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

oath,  to  be  taken  by  Senators,  upon  the  trial  of  an  impeachment, 
Senator  Hendricks  objected  that  he  was  not  competent  to  sit, 
inasmuch  as  he  was  the  President  pro  tern  of  the  Senate  and 
would  become  President  of  the  United  States,  if  the  impeach 
ment  be  sustained.  The  objection  provoked  a  debate.  The 
question  was  an  important  one.  A  two-thirds  vote  was  re 
quired  to  convict  and,  if  the  result  be  close,  he  might  have  the 
casting  vote.  Sumner  argued  that  the  Constitution  settled  the 
question,  that  impeachments  were  to  be  tried  by  the  Senate, 
that  this  meant  the  whole  Senate,  that  in  such  trial  each  State 
was  entitled  to  have  two  Senators,  that  one  of  these  from  Ohio 
was  Senator  Wade.  The  clause  in  the  Constitution  providing 
that,  when  the  President  is  impeached,  the  Chief  Justice  shall 
preside,  he  showed  from  contemporaneous  authority  was  not 
inserted  to  disqualify  the  President  of  the  Senate  from  taking 
part,  because  of  his  interest  in  the  result  as  was  asserted;  but 
because  he  might  be  called  upon,  in  case  of  the  suspension  of 
the  President,  to  act  in  his  place  and  hence  be  absorbed  in  the 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  that*  office  and  by  reason  thereof  not 
have  the  time  to  preside  at  the  trial.  Before,  however,  a  vote 
was  taken  upon  this  question,  the  objection  to  administering 
the  oath  to  Mr.  Wade  was  withdrawn  by  Mr.  Hendricks  and 
he  was  sworn  and  afterwards,  without  objection,  voted  upon 
each  of  the  three  articles  of  impeachment,  upon  which  a  vote 
was  taken. 

On  the  thirteenth  day  of  March  the  President  entered  his 
formal  appearance,  by  his  attorneys,  and  asked  that  forty  days 
be  allowed  him,  for  preparation.  The  Managers  insisted  that 
the  trial  proceed  at  once.  But  the  Senate  fixed  it  for  the 
thirtieth  day  of  March. 

In  the  meeting  of  the  Managers  for  the  distribution  of  their 
work,  the  most  desirable  place,  the  closing  argument,  was  as 
signed  to  the  chairman,  John  A.  Bingham.  Benjamin  F. 
Butler  desired  to  open  the  case  and  put  in  the  evidence.  He  has 
narrated  how  these  duties  were  disposed  of  in  the  meeting. 
"  '  But  who/  he  inquired,  '  is  to  make  the  opening  argument 
and  put  the  case  in  form  for  presentation,  in  the  Senate  ?  There 
are  less  than  three  days,  in  which  to  prepare  it.  Who  is  anxious 
for  that  place  ?'  There  were  not  many  candidates  for  that 
labor,  and  I  said,  '  Very  well.  I  suppose  as  usual  the  opening 
of  the  case  will  fall  upon  the  youngest  counsel  and  that  is  my 
self.  *  *  *  It  was  agreed  that  I  should  prepare  the  case  and 
make  the  opening  argument  and  I  thought  it  would  not  be  of 
much  consequence,  after  that  was  done,  who  did  the  rest.  And 
thus  I  became  the  leading  figure  of  the  impeachment,  for  better 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  597 

or  for  worse  *  *  *  I  canue  to  the  conclusion  to  try  the  case 
upon  the  same  rules  of  evidence  and  in  the  same  manner  as  I 
should  try  a  horse  case  and  I  knew  how  to  do  that/'  Judging 
from  his  want  of  success  in  this  case,  the  inference  would  be 
that  he  did  himself  honor  over  much,  in  saying  that  he  knew 
how  to  try  a  horse  case. 

The  trial  was  held  in  the  Senate  Chamber.  The  hall  and  its 
spacious  galleries  were  filled  to  their  utmost  capacity.  The 
House  attended  in  a  body  and  were  provided  with  seats  on  the 
floor.  The  diplomatic  gallery  was  filled  with  the  representatives 
of  foreign  countries,,  eager  to  see  the  spectacle  of  a  free  people 
bringing  to  trial  their  sovereign  ruler  for  malfeasance  in  office. 
The  press  gallery  was  crowded  with  correspondents,  who  were 
to  convey  the  news  of  what  took  place,  to  the  millions  of  plain 
people,  in  their  homes,  who  were  watching  the  action  of  their 
representatives.  The  beauty  and  the  intelligence  of  the  Capitol 
and  its  visitors  filled  to  overflowing  the  remaining  space. 

Salmon  P.  Chase,  the  Chief  Justice,  who  presided,  after  an 
eminent  career  at  the  bar,  and  in  political  life,  as  Governor 
and  Senator  from  Ohio,  and  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  during 
the  trying  years  of  the  war,  was  now  filling  the  highest  judicial 
station  of  his  country.  He  sat  erect,  broad-shouldered,  deep- 
chested  with  a  head  and  face  of  noble  mould,  one  of  the  hand 
somest  men  of  his  day.  Bingham,  the  chairman  of  the 
Managers,  with  the  refined  and  sensitive  face  and  the  grace  of  a 
poet,  was  still  in  his  prime.  He  was  the  lifelong  friend  of 
Stanton,  living  in  the  town  where  the  great  Secretary  first 
commenced  the  practice  of  law.  With  him  he  had  grown  up 
to  greatness ;  for  they  were  rivals  at  the  bar  and  jointly  debated 
political  questions,  Stanton  in  those  days  being  a  Democrat. 
Bingham  had  been  a  member  of  the  House  since  the  birth  of  the 
Republican  party  and,  as  a  brilliant  and  effective  orator,  his 
fame  was  as  wide  as  his  country.  He  was  supported,  perhaps  it 
would  be  more  proper  to  say,  he  was  led,  by  his  great  colleague 
Thaddeus  Stevens,  now  wasting  with  disease  and  within  six 
months  of  his  death,  but  with  the  grim  heroism  of  his  nature, 
dragging,  with  his  last  breath,  a  great  offender,  as  he  believed, 
to  the  bar  of  justice. 

But  in  legal  attainments,  the  Managers  were  outdone  by  their 
opponents.  Henry  Stanberry,  who  organized  the  President's 
defence,  and  paid  the  penalty  of  it  with  his  office,  was  his  At 
torney-General.  He  was  an  able  lawyer  and  resigned  his 
office  to  take  part  in  the  case.  After  its  close,  the  Senate 
refused  to  ratify  his  reappointment,  as  Attorney-General,  by 
Johnson.  William  M.  Evarts,  who  did  succeed  him,  as  well  as 


598  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Benjamin  R.  Curtis  and  William  S.  Groesbeck,  who  were 
associated  with  him  in  the  case,  were  at  the  head  of  the  bars  of 
New  York,  Boston  and  Cincinnati  respectively.  Curtis  had 
been  a  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and 
by  his  dissenting  opinion  in  the  Dred  Scott  case,  as  well  as  his 
other  work,  had  acquired  a  wide  reputation;  but  the  work 
proving  distasteful,  he  resigned  to  return  to  the  practice. 

In  the  articles  of  impeachment  there  were  eleven  charges, 
but  they  may  all  be  comprehended  in  four;  first,  The  removal 
of  Stanton  and  appointment  of  Thomas;  second,  Instructing 
General  Emory  that  the  law  requiring  all  military  orders  made 
by  the  President  or  Secretary  of  War  to  be  issued  through  the 
General  of  the  Army,  was  unconstitutional;  third,  The  Presi 
dent's  speeches  against  Congress;  fourth,  The  attempt  of  the 
President  to  prevent  the  execution  of  the  Tenure  of  Office  Law, 
the  Army  Appropriation  Law  and  the  law  for  the  more  efficient 
government  of  the  Rebel  States.  The  case  was  really  tried 
upon  two,  the  removal  of  Stanton  and  the  intemperate  speeches 
of  the  President  and,  of  these,  the  greatest  stress  was  laid  upon 
the  removal  of  Stanton. 

The  President  had  made  coarse,  intemperate  and  ill-timed 
speeches,  at  the  White  House,  on  August  eighteenth,  18G6,  at 
Cleveland,  Ohio,  on  September  third,  1866,  and  at  St.  Louis  on 
September  eighth,  1866,  charging  Congress  with  promoting 
disunion  and  discord  between  the  North  and  the  South  and 
preventing  reconciliation  between  the  sections,  with  trying  to 
break  up  the  government,  calling  its  members  traitors,  so  nam 
ing  some  of  them  individually,  and  calling  upon  the  people  to 
aid  him  in  kicking  them  out  of  office. 

There  could  be  no  justification  for  such  speeches.  They  were 
unbecoming  any  person  and  were  especially  unbecoming  a 
President  when  speaking  of  one  of  the  co-ordinate  departments 
of  his  government.  He  had  a  right  to  differ  from  Congress  in 
opinion;  and  he  had  a  right  to  maintain  his  own  views,  in 
public  speeches.  The  constitution  expressly  guarantees  the 
right  of  freedom  of  speech.  But  no  one  has  a  right,  anywhere, 
to  be  less  than  a  gentleman.  Coarse  speech  always  degrades 
the  author  of  it.  But  in  this  case,  his  apologists  could  well  urge 
that  he  had  said  nothing  more  bitter  of  Congress,  than  Con 
gress  had  said  of  him. 

As  to  the  removal  of  Stanton,  a  more  extended  explanation 
is  required.  The  Tenure  of  Office  Law  provided  "  That  every 
person  holding  any  civil  office,  to  which  he  has  been  appointed 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  and  every 
person  who  shall  hereafter  be  appointed  to  any  such  office,  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  599 

shall  become  duly  qualified  to  act  therein,  is,  and  shall  be,  en 
titled  to  hold  such  office  until  a  successor  shall  have  been  in  like 
manner  appointed  and  duly  qualified,  except  as  herein  other 
wise  Provided.  That  the  Secretary  of  State,  of  the  Treasury, 
of  War,  of  the  Navy,  and  of  the  Interior,  the  Postmaster- 
General,  and  the  Attorney-General  shall  hold  their  offices 
respectively  for  and  during  the  term  of  the  President,  by  whom 
they  may  have  been  appointed,  and  for  one  month  thereafter, 
subject  to  removal  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate." 

Stanton  was  appointed  by  President  Lincoln,  during  his  first 
term,  which  expired  March  fourth,  1865,  and  was  to  hold 
"  during  the  pleasure  of  the  President,  for  the  time  being," 
according  to  the  words  of  his  commission.  The  term  of  Presi 
dent  Lincoln  had  expired  and  he  had  taken  the  oath  of  office 
and  entered  upon  a  new  term,  after  a  new  election.  Stanton 
had  continued  to  hold  the  office  during  his  second  term,  until 
his  assassination,  and  likewise  under  President  Johnson,  with 
out  any  new  appointment  or  other  commission.  It  was  insisted 
by  the  President  and  his  friends  that  Stanton's  term  expired 
under  the  proviso  in  the  Tenure  of  Office  Law,  thirty  days 
after  the  expiration  of  President  Lincoln's  first  term,  that  the 
word  "term  "  as  used  in  this  statute  meant  the  four  years  for 
which  the  President  was  elected  and,  if  succeeding  to  office  as 
President  Johnson  did,  the  time  that  he  was  legally  to 
hold  the  office,  that  as  Secretary  Stanton  had  held  beyond  the 
thirty  days  after  the  expiration  of  President  Lincoln's  first 
term  he  had  held  merely  by  sufferance.  Hence  President  John 
son's  friends  claimed  that  Stanton  was  not  protected  in  his 
office  by  the  Tenure  of  Office  Law,  but  was  holding  over  simply 
and  that  the  President  had  a  right  to  tell  him  so,  at  any  time, 
and  appoint  his  successor,  as  he  had  done,  and  that  by  so  doing 
the  law  was  not  violated.  It  was  this  view  that  prevailed. 

The  opponents  of  the  President  believed  otherwise.  Sum- 
ner  argued  that  such  a  construction  of  the  word  "  term  "  in 
this  law  made  it  retroactive  as  to  Stanton,  who  was  in  office 
when  it  passed,  that  it  was  a  penal  statute  and  therefore  would 
become  an  ex-post  facto  law  and  hence  unconstitutional,  if 
such  a  construction  be  placed  upon  it,  that  it  also  made  Con 
gress  enact  the  absurdity  that  Stanton  had  for  two  years  been 
holding  office  illegally,  whereas  he  had  been  holding  under 
the  clearest  legal  title,  which  could  no  more  be  altered  by  leg 
islation  than  black  could  be  made  white,  that  such  a  construc 
tion,  which  made  the  statute  at  once  unconstitutional  and 
absurd,  should  be  rejected.  He  insisted,  on  the  contrary,  that 


600  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

President  Lincoln's  term  did  not  expire  with  his  life  but  con 
tinued  until  March  4,  1869,,  the  expiration  of  the  four  years 
for  which  he  was  elected  and  that  with  this  construction  Stan- 
ton  wcs  entitled  to  hold  until  April  4,  1869.  He  believed 
farther,  that  Stanton  should  be  considered  as  appointed  by 
President  Johnson,  that  the  continuance  of  Stanton  in  office 
with  the  concurrence  of  President  Johnson  was  the  equivalent  of 
an  appointment,  that  he  was  in  the  office  by  the  choice  of  the 
President,  when  the  law  was  passed  and  that  his  continuance 
there  by  the  President  was  to  be  treated  as  another  commis 
sion,  that  this  view  also  gave  effect  to  the  intention  of  the 
framers  of  the  act,  violated  no  sound  canon  of  construction  and 
was  entirely  reasonable,  in  every  respect. 

Great  efforts  were  made  by  some  of  the  President's  friends 
to  show  that  Stanton  did  not  come  within  the  protection  of 
the  proviso  of  this  law.  Sumner  insisted  that  such  friends  for 
got  that  if  the  Secretary  did  not  come  within  the  special  pro 
tection  of  the  proviso  he  must  come  within  the  general  protec 
tion  of  the  body  of  the  act  as  "  a  person  holding  a  civil  office  " 
and,  therefore,  "  entitled  to  hold  such  office  until  a  successor 
shall  have  been  in  like  manner  appointed  and  duly  qualified/' 
that  if  they  turned  him  out  of  the  proviso  he  must  fall  within 
the  body  of  the  act,  unless  they  "  placed  him  in  a  sort  of  in 
termediate  limbo,  like  a  lost  spirit  floating  in  space,"  a  con 
struction  utterly  unreasonable  and,  like  every  construction 
contrary  to  common  sense,  to  be  rejected. 

Sumner  advocated  the  broadest  treatment  of  the  subject.  He 
argued  that  impeachment  was  a  political  not  a  judicial  pro 
ceeding,  that  it  was  before  a  political  body,  for  political 
purposes,  subject  to  a  political  judgment  only,  expulsion  from 
office,  that  therefore  the  same  technicality  of  procedure  could 
not  be  required,  as  in  a  court.  Hence  he  argued  that  impeach 
ment  was  not  necessarily  a  trial  for  a  "  crime/'  as  that  word  is 
known  to  the  common  law,  that  offences  unknown  to  it,  such 
as  the  wanton  removal  of  meritorious  officers,  would  subject  the 
President  to  impeachment,  that  the  exact  minuteness  of  a  crim 
inal  court  should  be  discarded  and  the  procedure  adapted  to  a 
common  understanding,  that  they  could  not  be  held  in  the 
articles  of  impeachment  to  a  close  description  of  the  offence  as 
if  it  were  an  indictment,  nor  to  the  rules  of  evidence  as  they  are 
followed  in  the  courts.  He  voted  to  admit  all  the  evidence,  not 
trivial  or  obviously  irrelevant,  offered  during  the  trial,  leaving 
Senators  to  determine  what  weight  should  be  given  to  it.  He 
believed  the  Senators  should  take  notice  of  such  matters  as 
were  within  their  knowledge,  even  though  not  charged  or 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  601 

proven,  as,  that  Johnson  appeared  before  the  Senate,  in  a  dis 
graceful  state  of  intoxication,  when  he  took  the  oath  of  office  as 
Vice-President;  that  he  had  appointed  incompetent  and 
dishonest  officials,  as  in  the  "  Whiskey  King,"  that  had  robbed 
the  Treasury ;  that  he  had  obstructed  the  Civil  Eights  Law ;  had 
undertaken  to  prevent  the  execution  of  the  Freedman  Bureau 
Law,  to  succor  starving  and  homeless  negroes  in  the  South; 
and  had  sought  to  defeat  the  ratification,  by  the  Southern 
States,  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  giving  the  guarantees 
of  irrepealable  law  to  the  equal  rights  of  the  citizen  and  to  the 
payment  of  the  national  debt. 

There  is  much  authority  in  English  and  French  impeachment 
cases,  as  Sumner  showed  for  the  breadth  of  treatment,  which  he 
advocated.  But  precedents  on  the  subject  of  impeachment  from 
those  countries  do  not  carry  the  weight  of  authority  here,  that 
the  decisions  of  their  courts  do  upon  other  questions.  Some  of 
them,  as  the  Earl  of  Stratford's  case  cited,  bear  too  close  a  re 
lation  to  the  revolutions  in  those  countries  and  recall  some  of 
the  darkest  pages  in  their  history.  Sumner  felt  that  the  arti 
cles  of  impeachment  did  not  state  the  whole  case  against  the 
President  and  he  was  undoubtedly  correct  in  this  conclusion. 
But  the  President  was  clearly  entitled  to  have  the  charges  upon 
which  he  was  to  be  tried  set  out,  so  as  to  know  in  advance  what 
he  would  be  called  upon  to  answer.  In  a  matter  of  such  im 
portance,  if  it  was  intended  to  try  him  for  his  other  offences, 
they  should  have  been  charged  in  the  articles. 

A  question  arose  upon  the  right  of  the  Chief  Justice  to  rule 
or  vote.  Sumner  argued  that  the  Chief  Justice  was  not  a 
member  of  the  Senate  and  that  his  duty  was  simply  to  put  the 
question  and  direct  generally  the  conduct  of  the  business,  with 
out  undertaking  in  any  way,  by  voice  or  vote,  to  determine  any 
question.  In  this  conclusion  he  differed  from  the  Chief  Jus 
tice,  who  claimed  the  right  to  rule  upon  questions  of  admis- 
sibility  of  evidence.  The  attorneys  for  the  President  offered  to> 
prove  that  when  the  Tenure  of  Office  Bill  was  before  the  Presi 
dent  for  approval  he  was  advised  by  his  Cabinet  that  it  was 
unconstitutional  and  the  duty  of  preparing  the  message  to 
accompany  the  veto  devolved  on  Seward  and  Stanton.  The 
Chief  Justice  decided  that  this  testimony  was  competent,  to 
show  that  he  acted  in  good  faith,  under  advice,  in  vetoing  it. 
His  decision  was  appealed  from  and  the  Senate  overruled  him 
and  the  testimony  was  excluded.  Again,  the  Chief  Justice  ruled 
that  it  was  competent  for  the  President  to  show  that  when  the 
Tenure  of  Office  Law  was  under  discussion  in  the  Cabinet  the 
opinion  was  expressed  generally  that  the  Cabinet  officers  ap- 


602  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

pointed  by  Mr.  Lincoln  were  not  within  the  restrictions  placed 
on  President  Johnson's  .power  of  removal.  Again  he  was 
overruled  by  the  Senate.  After  that,  the  Chief  Justice,  without 
ruling  upon  the  objection  made  to  testimony,  referred  the  mat 
ter  to  a  vote  of  the  Senate.  These  rulings  of  the  Chief  Justice 
were  generally  accepted  by  the  public  as  correct  and  the  adverse 
votes  of  the  Senate  produced  a  bad  impression.  Sumner  be 
lieved  the  testimony  should  have  been  admitted,  but  he  insisted 
that  the  Chief  Justice  had  no  right  to  rule  upon  it  and  thus 
influence  the  proceedings. 

The  claim  was  also  made  that  the  Chief  Justice,  in  the  event 
of  a  tie,  had  the  right  to  vote.  He  did  vote  upon  some  unim 
portant  matters.  Sumner  was  unwilling  to  allow  any  such 
claim.  He  insisted  that  the  Constitution  expressly  provided 
that  the  Senate  is  to  "  have  the  sole  power  to  try  all  impeach 
ments  "  and  that  convictions  could  only  be  had  by  "  the  con 
currence  of  two-thirds  of  the  members  present "  and  that  these 
two  provisions  confined  the  right  to  vote  to  the  Senators  alone. 

He  offered  a  resolution  that  the  Chief  Justice  had  no  right 
to  vote  on  any  question  during  the  trial  and  that  he  could  pro 
nounce  a  decision  only  as  the  organ  of  the  Senate  and  with  its 
assent.  This  was  voted  down;  but  the  Senate  afterwards 
adopted  a  rule  providing  that  the  Chief  Justice  "  may  rule  all 
questions  of  evidence  and  incidental  questions,  which  ruling 
shall  stand  as  the  judgment  of  the  Senate,  unless  some  mem 
ber  of  the  Senate  shall  ask  that  a  formal  vote  be  taken  thereon, 
in  which  case  it  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Senate  for  decision ; 
or  he  may  at  his  option,  in  the  first  instance,  submit  any  such 
question  to  a  vote  of  the  members  of  the  Senate." 

At  the  close  of  his  argument  upon  this  question,  which  Sum 
ner  filed  and  had  printed  in  the  proceedings  with  his  opinion  in 
the  case,  he  made  a  graceful  reference  to  his  co-operation  with 
the  Chief  Justice,  in  the  anti-slavery  cause,  in  the  years  pre 
ceding  the  war: 

"  I  cannot  bring  this  survey  to  an  end  without  an  expression 
of  deep  regret  that  I  find  myself  constrained  to  differ  from  the 
Chief  Justice,"  he  said.  "  In  faithful  fellowship,  for  long  years, 
we  have  striven  together  for  the  establishment  of  Liberty  and 
Equality  as  the  fundamental  law  of  this  Eepublic.  I  know  his 
fidelity,  and  revere  his  services,  but  not  on  this  account  can  I 
hesitate  the  less,  when  I  find  him  claiming  in  this  Chamber  an 
important  power  which,  in  my  judgment,  is  three  times  denied 
in  the  National  Constitution :  first  when  it  is  declared  that  the 
Senate  alone  shall  try  impeachment ;  secondly,  when  it  is  de 
clared  that  only  members  shall  convict;  and  thirdly,  when  it  is 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  603 

declared  that  the  Chief  Justice  shall  preside  and  nothing  more, 
thus  conferring  upon  him  those  powers  only,  which  by  par 
liamentary  law  belong  to  a  presiding  officer  not  a  member  of 
the  body.  In  the  face  of  such  a  claim,  so  entirely  without  ex 
ample,  and  of  such  possible  consequences,  I  cannot  be  silent. 
Eeluctantly  and  painfully  I  offer  this  respectful  protest." 

An  incident  occurred  during  the  trial  that  shows  how  sen 
sitive  Sumner  was  of  the  dignity  of  the  Senate.  During  the 
heat  of  his  argument  on  April  twenty-eighth,  Nelson  of  Ten 
nessee,  one  of  the  President's  attorneys,  used  language  toward 
Manager  Butler,  apparently  intended  to  provoke  a  duel. 
Promptly  upon  the  opening  of  the  proceedings  the  next  day, 
Sumner  offered  a  resolution  of  censure  and  pressed  it,  until  a 
proper  apology  was  made  by  Mr.  Nelson  to  the  Senate. 

The  closing  argument  in  the  case  was  finished  by  Manager 
Bingham  on  May  sixth,  1868.  No  vote  was  taken  on  the  guilt 
of  the  President  until  May  sixteenth,  the  intervening  ten  days 
being  occupied  with  discussions  of  methods  of  procedure  and 
adjournments.  Sumner  opposed  a  resolution  granting  to  Sen 
ators  leave  to  file  opinions  in  the  case,  giving  the  reasons  for 
their  votes;  believing  the  President  guilty  on  all  the  articles, 
he  felt  there  was  no  need  of  explanation  or  apology  for  his  vote. 
But  the  resolution  having  carried,  he  accepted  the  invitation 
which  it  seemed  to  extend.  Twenty-eight  other  Senators  also 
published  opinions.  Sumner's  covers  thirty-four  pages  of  the 
report  of  the  proceedings  and  is  the  longest  and  one  of  the 
most  exhaustive  of  the  opinions ;  but  as  a  legal  argument  upon 
the  question  of  the  President's  guilt  or  innocence,  it  is  not  the 
equal  of  some  of  the  others.  The  Senate  had  in  it,  at  that  time, 
some  very  able  lawyers,  who  embraced  this  opportunity  of  ex 
plaining  their  votes.  Sumner,  as  a  lawyer,  was  not  the  equal  of 
some  of  these  Senators.  He  had  quit  the  bar  early  and  never 
had  an  extensive  practice. 

It  was  decided  to  vote  on  the  several  articles  of  impeachment 
separately,  the  vote  first  to  be  taken  on  the  eleventh  and  last 
article,  excluding  Stanton  from  office  after  the  Senate  refused 
to  concur  in  his  suspension,  interfering  with  the  execution  of 
certain  acts  of  Congress  and  denying  the  power  of  Congress  to 
pass  laws  because  the  Rebel  States  were  not  represented.  Each 
Senator  as  his  name  was  called  was  to  rise  to  his  feet  and  an 
nounce  his  vote,  guilty  or  not  guilty,  as  charged  in  this  article. 
It  was  decided  to  vote  or/  this  article  first,  because  it  was  a 
compendium  of  the  principal  charges  and  a  vote  upon  it  would 
therefore  show  the  greatest  strength  of  the  prosecution. 

The   vote   showed   thirty-five   for   conviction    and   nineteen 


604  LIFE  OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

against  so  that  the  necessary  two-thirds  not  voting  guilty,  the 
impeachment  was  not  sustained  on  this  article.  A  change  of 
one  vote  would  have  changed  the  result.  An  adjournment  was 
taken  for  ten  days  and  a  vote  was  then  taken  upon  the  second 
and  third  articles,  but  with  the  same  result.  No  farther  vote 
was  taken  and  none  of  the  articles  of  impeachment  having  been 
sustained,  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  members  present,  a  gen 
eral  judgment  of  acquittal  was  ordered  and  the  Senate,  sitting 
as  a  court  of  impeachment,  adjourned  without  day. 

The  great  trial  was  ended  and  the  President  was  clear.  It 
was  a  hasty,  ill-advised,  and,  on  the  part  of  his  prosecutors,  in 
many  respects,  a  badly  managed  proceeding.  The  haste  and 
want  of  care  with  which  it  was  conceived  showed  itself  early. 
From  the  commencement,  its  friends  felt  hampered  by  the 
omission  from  the  articles  of  all  reference  to  the  most  serious 
fault  of  the  President,  his  persistently  hostile  attitude  toward 
the  North  and  his  championship  of  the  South,  in  the  settle 
ment  of  all  questions  growing  out  of  the  war.  Another  mis 
take  was  made  by  the  House  in  permitting  the  prominence  of 
General  Butler  in  the  proceedings.  He  did  not  possess  the 
public  confidence  and  his  methods  and  manner  were  not  suited 
to  his  position.  The  sympathy  of  the  Chief  Justice  was  felt  to 
be  against  the  proceeding  and  his  influence  with  the  people  was 
large.  But  the  people  felt  that  the  result  was  right,  that  the 
precedent  of  impeaching  a  President,  on  such  grounds  as 
existed,  would  have  been  much  more  prejudicial  to  the  country, 
than  anything  he  had  done  or  would  be  able  to  do,  in  the 
little  of  his  term  that  remained.  The  real  fault  of  the  Presi 
dent  was  a  going  over  to  the  opposition,  while  in  office,  and  for 
this,  political  defeat  and  not  impeachment  was  the  remedy.  It 
was  Congress  that  was  especially  outraged  by  his  conduct  and 
the  fight  was  peculiarly  theirs.  The  moral  results  of  it,  indeed, 
were  with  Congress,  at  last.  At  the  close  of  it,  all  chance  of 
the  President  succeeding  himself  was  at  an  end;  the  North 
was  awakened  to  the  danger  of  his  re-election;  neither  party 
was  willing  to  make  him  its  candidate.  In  nine  months  he 
gave  place  to  General  Grant ;  and  Andrew  Johnson,  as  a  force 
in  National  politics,  then  disappeared  forever.  Though  he 
was  returned  to  the  Senate  six  years  later,  his  brief  service  of 
less  than  a  month  was  only  signalized  by  a  vindictive  assault 
upon  those  who  had  been  the  friends  of  his  best  days.  His 
strange  career  was  then  closed  by  death. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII 

NEW    POLITICAL    QUESTIONS THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1868 GRANT 

ELECTED SUMNER  RE-ELECTED  TO  SENATE A.  T.  STEWART 

DISQUALIFIED  FOR  SECRETARY   OF  TREASURY FISH,   SECRE 
TARY  OF  STATE MOTLEY 

IN  the  campaign  for  the  election  of  General  Grant  other 
questions  were  forcing  themselves  to  the  front.  The  large  na 
tional  debt,  which  accumulated  during  the  war,  was  fruitful  of 
contention.  One  question  was  whether  it  should  be  paid  soon, 
which  involved  the  maintenance  of  the  income  tax  and  high 
revenues  on  tobacco  and  whiskey  and  the  existing  tariff  rates,  or 
whether  a  part  of  the  debt  should  be  left  for  future  generations 
to  pay  and  these  means  of  raising  money  be  modified.  Repudia 
tion  in  different  forms  was  being  discussed.  No  party  had  ad 
vocated  repudiation  pure  and  simple,  by  an  outright  refusal  to 
pay  the  Government  bonds.  It  would  have  been  a  very  bold 
move,  to  ask  openly  the  votes  of  a  free  people,  upon  such  a 
plank  as  that,  in  a  political  platform.  But  the  bonds  were 
payable  in  coin,  and  there  were  open  advocates  of  the  payment 
of  them  in  greenbacks,  which  were  at  the  time  depreciated. 
The  argument  was  made  that  the  Government  making  green 
backs  a  legal  tender  for  the  payment  of  other  debts,  should 
also  require  the  bondholders  to  accept  them  in  payment  of 
the  principal  and  interest  of  their  bonds.  To  pay  a  debt  in  a 
paper  dollar  worth  fifty  cents,  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  that 
was  stipulated  to  be  paid  in  a  gold  or  silver  dollar,  worth  one 
hundred  cents  everywhere,  would  be  repudiation  in  fact,  if  not 
in  name. 

Another  question  growing  out  of  this  same  condition  was 
the  taxation  of  the  Government  bonds.  The  laws  providing  for 
their  issue  and  under  which  they  were  sold,  provided  that  they 
should  be  exempt  from  all  taxes,  State  or  National.  The  claim 
was  now  made  that  they  should  be  taxed  just  as  other  property 
and  that  Congress  should  pass  laws  requiring  it.  This  would 
result  in  depreciating  the  value  of  the  bonds.  Their  non-tax 
able  character  made  them  a  desirable  form  of  investment  and, 
to  take  away  this  character,  meant  to  depreciate  their  value,  in 
violation  of  the  faith  upon  which  the  Government  had  sold 
them. 

605 


606  L1FE   OF   CHARLES   8UMNER 

Still  another  question  that  arose,  incidentally  connected  with 
these  two,  was  the  resumption  of  specie  payments.  If  the  paper 
dollar  was  made  exchangeable  for  a  dollar  in  gold  or  silver 
there  could  be  no  longer  a  question  made  in  what  kind  of  money 
the  bonds  should  be  paid.  A  sound  financial  course  upon  this 
question  would  solve  the  other. 

These  questions  all  arose  during  the  Presidency  of  Andrew 
Johnson  and  were  discussed  in  some  of  the  State  campaigns. 
Summer's  attention  had  not  been  given  largely  to  questions  of 
this  kind.  He  had  been  occupied  with  slavery  and  the  war  and 
the  condition  of  the  freedmen.  And  he  had  been  so  prominent 
in  the  treatment  of  these  subjects  that  he  was  credited  with 
being  especially  able  in  the  discussion  of  them,  but  was  con 
sidered  wanting  in  qualification  for  the  treatment  of  financial 
questions.  His  life  had  been  singularly  free  from  the  ordinary 
problems  of  money  getting.  He  was  born  to  a  condition  of 
comfort  and,  being  without  family  to  provide  for,  his  attention 
had  been  given  almost  exclusively  to  the  great  work  of  his  life. 
But  with  these  new  problems  that  came  up  for  solution  he 
developed  an  unexpected  ability  for  their  treatment.  He  had  in 
fact  a  practical  side  and  a  fund  of  good  sense  upon  common 
matters,  partly  inherited  from  his  mother,  with  which  he  was 
not  generally  credited.  He  intuitively  saw  and  followed  the 
just  and  the  honest  side  of  a  question,  involving  right  and 
wrong.  Xo  specious  arguments,  or  pretty  theories,  seemed  to 
trouble  him.  He  went  straight  to  the  proposition  presented, 
with  the  question,  Is  it  right?  The  answer  to  that  simple 
question  determined  his  course.  Does  the  contract  provide  for 
the  payment  of  these  bonds  in  coin?  Does  the  contract  provide 
for  the  exemption  of  them  from  taxation  ?  If  it  does,  then  they 
must  be  paid  in  coin  and  continued  exempt  from  taxation. 
The  nation  has  no  more  right  to  violate  its  contract,  than  an 
individual.  It  can  no  more  do  so  with  impunity.  Any  other 
course  involves  loss  of  credit  and  invites  financial  ruin.  These 
were  the  considerations  that  determined  him.  He  studied 
them  and  he  discussed  them  in  this  way. 

On  July  eleventh,  18G8,  the  Senate  having  under  considera 
tion  a  bill  for  the  funding  of  the  national  debt,  he  spoke  at 
some  length  and  with  his  customary  thoroughness.  He  argued 
that  there  was  nothing  more  sensitive  than  credit,  that  a  breath 
would  make  it  flutter,  that  the  public  faith  must  be  sacredly 
preserved  above  suspicion,  that  the  nation  must  be  as  good  as 
its  bond,  that  credit  was  like  honor,  once  lost,  more  than  dis 
honor  must  be  the  consequence,  that  in  itself  it  was  a  treasury, 
a  tariff  and  an  internal  revenue,  all  in  one,  that  if  all  these 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  607 

were  lost  and  public  faith  retained,  the  others  would  be  re 
turned,  the  treasury  be  replenished,  the  tariff  be  renewed,  the 
revenue  restored,  that  it  must  be  kept  "  as  the  philosopher's 
stone  of  fable,  having  which,  you  have  all."  In  the  face  of  this, 
he  said,  it  was  proposed  to  tax  the  national  bonds,  in  violation 
of  the  original  contract  on  which  the  money  was  lent.  They 
might  have  the  power  to  do  this  wrong,  but  never  the  right. 
They  could  not  make  wrong  right.  The  bargain  must  con 
tinue  unchanged  except  by  consent  of  the  parties,  until  the 
laws  of  the  universe  tumbled  into  chaos.  A  proud  nation, 
justly  sensitive  to  national  honor,  could  do  nothing  else. 

Not  different,  he  argued,  was  the  proposition  to  pay  the  bonds 
with  inconvertible  paper.  On  the  threshold,  Public  Faith 
interposed  a  summary  protest  to  such  a  proposition.  On  such 
a  question  debate  even  is  dangerous;  the  man  who  doubts  is 
lost.  The  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury  and  their  assistants  had 
declared  they  were  payable  in  coin.  It  had  been  the  uniform 
practice  to  pay  them  in  this  kind  of  money.  This  practice  had 
established  precedents  that  could  not  be  broken.  The  money 
had  been  invested  in  all  the  later  bonds  upon  the  faith  of  these 
acts  of  the  Government.  They  must  continue  to  pay  the  bonds 
in  the  same  way. 

He  advocated,  however,  a  rigid  reduction  of  expenditures 
and  the  simplification  of  our  system  of  taxation,  by  confining 
the  tax  to  fewer  articles,  such  as  whiskey  and  tobacco,  so  that 
fewer  tax-gatherers  would  be  needed  and  the  collection  be  less 
expensive.  The  prompt  and  exact  fulfilment  of  our  obligation 
in  the  payment  of  the  bonds  he  believed  would  enable  us  to 
exchange  a  new  bond  with  a  lower  rate  of  interest,  running  for 
a  longer  time,  for  the  old  bonds  at  a  high  rate,  soon  to  expire. 
He  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  our  bonds  in  London  sold 
for  twenty  per  cent  less  than  the  English,  although  the  interest 
on  ours  was  double  that  on  theirs.  He  showed  that  the  same 
was  true  of  the  bonds  of  Massachusetts,  which  sold  higher  in 
London  than  those  of  our  Government.  This  difference,  he 
said,  was  due  to  the  higher  credit  of  England  and  Massachu 
setts.  The  agitation  of  repudiation  was  producing  this  result 
and  so  our  Government  was  already  paying  the  penalty  of 
this  heresy.  The  remedy  would  be  found  in  the  prompt  ful 
filment  of  our  contracts,  as  made,  and  the  speedy  return  to 
specie  payments. 

These  questions  entered  into  the  campaign  for  the  election 
of  General  Grant.  The  Republican  platform  of  1868  denounced 
all  forms  of  repudiation  and  demanded  the  payment  of  the 
National  debt,  according  to  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  laws 


608  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

under  which  it  was  contracted,  but  advocated  a  refunding  of 
the  bonds  for  a  longer  time  and  at  a  lower  rate  of  interest. 
It  pronounced  for  equal  civil  and  political  rights  and  guar 
anteed  suffrage  to  all  loyal  men  at  the  South.  The  Demo 
cratic  convention  nominated  Seymour  and  Blair  against  Grant 
and  Colfax,  denounced  the  reconstruction  measures  of  the 
Republicans  and  proposed  the  payment  of  the  national  debt 
in  greenbacks. 

Sumner  spoke  twice  only  during  the  campaign.  He  was  suf 
fering  from  a  stubborn  affection  of  the  throat  and  was  coun 
selled  against  all  public  speaking,  by  his  physician.  Once  he 
spoke  briefly  at  a  flag  raising  of  the  Grant  and  Colfax  Club,  on 
September  fourteenth,  in  the  ward,  in  Boston,  where  he  was 
born  and  had  always  voted.  This  was  on  Beacon  Hill,  the 
highest  point  in  Boston,  where  in  early  days  were  lighted  the 
beacon  fires  that  flashed  the  news  of  danger  over  the  surround 
ing  country.  He  prophesied  that  they  were  lighting  there  the 
fires  of  congratulation  and  of  joy.  Four  years  before,  this  had 
been  counted  a  doubtful  District.  When  the  election  was  over, 
Sumner  had  telegraphed  Lincoln  that  it  had  gone  Republican 
by  five  thousand  majority.  It  was  the  first  word  the  President 
had  of  his  re-election  and  when  he  received  it,  he  remarked  :  "  If 
this  is  a  specimen  of  the  doubtful  Districts,  what  may  we  expect 
of  the  whole  country  ?  " 

Sumner  spoke  again,  on  October  twenty-ninth,  at  the  City 
Hall,  in  Cambridge.  The  Massachusetts  Republican  Conven 
tion,  held  at  Worcester,  September  ninth,  had  indorsed  him  for 
re-election  to  the  Senate.  At  the  opening  of  his  speech  he 
therefore  referred  briefly  to  his  own  record  of  the  preceding 
six  years.  It  began,  while  the  war  was  still  in  progress  and 
saw  its  triumphant  close,  the  abolition  of  slavery,  the  establish 
ment  of  equal  rights  in  the  court-room  and  at  the  ballot-box 
and  the  acquisition  of  Alaska.  In  all  these  things  he  had 
borne  his  part  in  the  Senate, — a  part,  he  trusted,  not  unworthy 
of  the  commonwealth  he  represented.  Upon  his  service  he 
invited  their  scrutiny  and  candid  judgment.  He  could  not 
forget,  he  said,  that  there  had  been  much  clamor  at  two  prop 
ositions  he  had  advocated ;  first,  the  power  of  Congress  over  the 
States  that  had  rebelled  and  abandoned  their  practical  rela 
tion  with  the  Union ;  second,  the  necessity  of  securing  to  the 
freedmen  their  equal  civil  and  political  rights.  All  this  con 
tention  he  recognized  as  happily  at  an  end,  within  the  ranks  of 
the  Republican  party,  and  was  continued  now  only  by  those 
lately  in  rebellion  and  their  sympathizers  at  the  North. 

Though  formal  criticism  of  these  things  which  he  had  ad- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  609 

vocated.  so  early  and  vigorously,,  had  now  disappeared,  there 
was  yet  left  an  occasional  warning  against  "  men  of  one  idea," 
with  a  finger  point  at  himself.  What  duty,  he  demanded,  had 
he  failed  to  perform  or  what  interest  had  he  neglected?  He 
had  given  warning  early  against  an  inconvertible  currency  and 
recently  had  urged  a  return  to  specie  payments.  With  every 
form  of  the  business  of  the  Senate,  with  taxation,  commerce  or 
railroads,  or  the  business  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Rela 
tions,  of  which  he  was  chairman,  he  had  borne  his  part.  But 
while  doing  this  he  had  felt  it  to  be  his  supreme  duty  to  warn 
against  the  perils  of  slavery  in  all  its  forms  and  insist  upon 
every  guarantee  against  its  re-establishment.  In  season  and  out 
of  season,  in  the  Senate  and  elsewhere,  he  had  urged  its  aboli 
tion  and  the  destruction  of  its  whole  brood  of  inequalities.  In 
such  a  cause  he  had  felt  that  no  one  could  do  too  much,  no 
wisdom  could  be  too  great,  no  voice  too  eloquent,  no  courage 
too  persevering.  Who  upon  this  question  had  been  "  practical  ", 
he  inquired,  but  the  company  of  those  who  had  been  with  him? 
"  Permit  me  to  say/'  he  added,  "  that  the  '  practical '  statesman 
foresees  the  future  and  provides  for  it.  Whoever  does  anything 
with  his  whole  heart  makes  it  for  the  time  his  '  one  idea '. 
Every  discoverer,  every  inventor,  every  poet,  every  artist,  every 
orator,  every  general,  every  statesman  is  absorbed  in  his  work ; 
and  he  succeeds  just  in  proportion  as,  for  the  time,  it  becomes 
his  '  one  idea ?.  The  occasion  must  not  be  unworthy  or  petty ; 
but  the  more  complete  the  self-dedication,  the  more  effective  is 
the  result."  Personally  he  felt  he  had  nothing  to  regret,  but 
his  own  inadequacy.  He  would  have  done  more,  if  he  could. 
His  "  idea  "  had  been  nothing  less  than  his  "  country,  with  all 
that  is  contained  in  that  inspiring  word,  and  with  the  infinite 
vista  of  the  same  blessings  for  all  mankind  ". 

It  is  to  be  remembered  in  view  of  what  follows  in  this  narra 
tive,  that,  in  this  speech,  Sumner  repeatedly  spoke  in  the 
highest  terms  of  General  Grant  as  "  an  illustrious  citizen " 
and  "  of  unequal  renown  in  the  suppression  of  the  Rebellion  ", 
instancing  his  career  as  an  example  of  "  one  idea  "  pursued  to 
a  triumphant  end,  when  after  planning  his  campaign,  he  an 
nounced  that  he  meant  to  "  fight  it  out  on  this  line,  if  it  took 
all  summer"  and  yet,  with  no  occasion  for  reproach,  except 
from  rebels,  who  would  have  been  glad  to  see  him  fail  in  that 
singleness  of  purpose,  which  gave  him  the  victory.  In  the  con 
test  which  afterward  arose  between  Sumner  and  Grant,  over 
San  Domingo,  which  led  to  the  removal  of  Sumner  from  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  and  his  separation  from  his 


610  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

party,  this  early  and  pronounced  friendship  becomes  a  land 
mark  from  which  reckonings  can  be  made. 

With  all  earnestness,  Sumner  urged  his  hearers  to  vote  for 
the  party,  with  Grant  at  its  head,  that  had  saved  the  Republic, 
and  not  hand  the  country  over  "  to  the  rebels  and  their  allies  ". 
He  declared  that  Blair,  the  Democratic  candidate  for  Vice- 
President,  in  calling  upon  President  Johnson  to  declare  the 
reconstruction  laws  void  and  compel  the  army  to  undo  their 
work  and  disperse  the  "  carpet-bag  "  government,  at  the  South, 
was  guilty  of  greater  nullification  than  that  which  had  induced 
President  Jackson  to  threaten  to  hang  John  C.  Calhoun.  The 
Democrats  had  declared  that  Congress  had  no  power  to  pass 
these  laws.  Sumner  argued  that  Congress  had  this  power, 
that  these  States  were  under  the  control  of  Congress,  because 
they  were  without  governments  of  their  own  and  therefore  of 
necessity,  as  in  the  case  of  Territories,  it  must  take  charge  of 
them,  because,  having  been  conquered,  the  conqueror,  accord 
ing  to  the  laws  of  war,  has  control  of  his  conquests,  because 
the  constitutional  amendment  abolishing  slavery,  gave  Con 
gress  power  to  enforce  this  abolition  and  because  Congress  was 
bound  by  the  Constitution  to  guarantee  to  each  State  a  repub 
lican  government.  Hence  he  argued  there  could  be  no  question 
of  the  power  of  Congress  to  pass  these  laws. 

Another  objection,,  that  was  vigorously  made  by  the  Demo 
crats  to  the  Reconstruction  Laws,  was  that  they  had  extended 
the  right  of  suffrage  to  the  freedmen.  Sumner  argued  that 
this  was  only  an  act  of  justice  to  those  who  had  aided  to  save 
the  Republic,  that  while  it  was  true  that  many  of  them  could 
neither  read  nor  write,  yet  it  must  be  remembered  that  there 
were  many  other  good  citizens,  whose  only  school  had  been  the 
rough  world,  in  whom  character  was  developed  to  a  remarkable 
degree,  that  you  could  not  make  men  all  equal  in  fact,  that 
Charles  James  Fox,  the  great  English  statesman,  had  been 
driven  to  the  poles  to  vote,  only  to  find  when  he  reached  there 
that  his  coachman  was  voting  the  other  way,  when  he  had 
remonstrated  with  him  for  not  telling  him  sooner  so  that  they 
might  have  paired  off,  that  though  this  incident  showed  an  ap 
parent  equality  between  the  men  it  was  not  so  in  reality,  for 
this  brilliant  leader  had  influenced  multitudes  of  his  fellow- 
citizens  by  his  example.  The  ordinary  man  had  nothing  but 
his  vote  to  counterbalance  the  vote  of  the  statesman.  He 
should  not  be  deprived  of  that.  Tie  had  nothing  to  counter 
balance  this  influence.  The  ballot  was  necessary,  he  insisted, 
to  prevent  a  revival  of  slavery,  in  new  forms,  by  hostile  legis 
lation,  in  the  Southern  States,  and  to  ward  off  the  threatened 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  611 

violence,  assassination  and  barbarism  of  the  Ku-Klux-Klan. 
To  repeal  the  Reconstruction  Laws  would  mean  to  break  down 
the  barriers  of  protection  thrown  around  the  loyal  people  of 
the  South. 

The  other  issues  that  were  discussed  in  the  campaign  grew 
out  of  the  bonds.  Sumner  reiterated  his  warning  against  the 
taxation  of  the  bonds,  in  violation  of  the  contract  when  the 
money  was  lent,  and  against  the  payment  of  the  interest  in 
greenbacks.  Taxation  would  mean  a  confiscation  of  the  addi 
tional  price  paid  for  the  bonds,  on  the  faith  that  they  were  not 
taxable.  The  bondholders  had  trusted  to  the  faith  of  the  nation 
in  the  payment  of  this  price.  He  reminded  them  of  the  ex 
clamation  of  Charles  James  Fox  to  the  proposal  of  a  kindred 
breach  of  national  faith :  "  Oh,  no,  no,  no !  His  claims  are 
doubly  binding  who  trusts  to  the  rectitude  of  another ! "  To 
pay  the  interest  in  greenbacks  would  be  ruinous  to  the  national 
credit.  The  greenbacks  were  not  payment;  they  were  simply 
promises  to  pay.  If  nobody  had  breathed  such  a  proposition 
the  nation  would  have  been  richer,  for  the  bonds  could  then 
have  been  paid,  by  the  issue  of  others  with  a  longer  time  to  run 
and  at  a  lower  rate  of  interest.  "Here,"  he  said,  "was  an 
annual  tax  of  millions  imposed  by  these  praters  of  repudiation." 
Sumner  again  insisted  upon  the  resumption  of  specie  pay 
ments.  He  proposed  the  fourth  of  July  of  the  following  year, 
as  the  date  to  resume.  It  was  destined  to  come  ten  years  later 
and  to  the  great  benefit  of  the  country.  But  to  have  brought  it 
about  so  soon  as  Sumner  suggested  would  probably  have  caused 
a  serious  financial  disturbance. 

The  result  of  the  election  was,  upon  the  electoral  vote,  over 
whelmingly  for  the  Republicans.  But  to  a  more  careful  ob 
server,  looking  behind  this  vote,  there  were  many  causes  for 
serious  reflection.  New  York,  New  Jersey  and  Oregon  had 
gone  Democratic.  California  was  Republican  by  a  majority  of 
five  hundred  and  fourteen ;  Indiana  was  correspondingly  close ; 
the  majorities  in  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  were  greatly  reduced. 
Six  of  the  reconstructed  Southern  States — North  Carolina, 
South  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Alabama,  Arkansas  and  Florida — 
saved  the  election  to  the  Republicans.  If  the  South  had  been 
solid,  as  it  has  been  so  often  since,  Grant  would  have  been  de 
feated.  Evidence  of  shameless  frauds  and  violence,  in  Louis 
iana,  was  abundant  and  there  was  similar  evidence  concerning 
Georgia.  Both  had  gone  Democratic.  Grant's  election  being 
assured,  no  investigation  was  made  by  Congress.  It  was  un 
fortunate  that  this  was  not  done  with  promptness  and  thor 
oughness,  and  the  vote  of  Louisiana,  where  the  evidence  was 


612  LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

overwhelming,  rejected.  If  this  had  been  done  and  the  leaders 
vigorously  punished,  an  infinite  amount  of  trouble  later  would 
have  been  saved  and  the  credit  of  the  nation  upheld.  Sumner 
believed  that  it  should  not  be  thus  lightly  passed  over,  and 
voted  for  a  resolution  introduced  by  Morton  of  Indiana,  mak 
ing  a  record  of  the  Senate's  knowledge  of  these  frauds.  But 
the  resolution  was  defeated. 

One  result  of  the  election  was  the  return  of  Sumner  to  the 
Senate,  for  another  term  of  six  years.  His  election  took  place 
in  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  on  the  nineteenth  day  of 
January,  1869.  It  was  destined  to  be  his  last.  The  unanimity 
of  the  choice  was  unusual.  He  received  in  the  Senate  every 
vote,  save  two,  and  in  the  House  two  hundred  and  sixteen,  out 
of  two  hundred  and  thirty-two  votes.  Henceforth  he  was  to 
be  the  senior  Senator,  in  continuous  service.  Since  the  first 
inauguration  of  Lincoln  he  had  been  the  most  widely  known 
and  most  conspicuous  man  in  the  Senate. 

Much  credit  is  due  to  the  great  State  that  had  thus  long  and 
thus  unitedly  sustained  him.  Those  nearest  to  him  knew  with 
what  toil  he  had  deserved  it.  The  Duchess  of  Argyll,  shortly 
after  this  time  wrote  from  England :  "  Is  not  what  Dr. 
Chalmers  called  your  '  Sabbath  of  Life '  come  when  you  feel 
that  you  may  give  up  the  strife  of  politics  and  have  time  for 
still  better  things  ?  It  has  been  a  very  full  day  of  work,  and  I 
wish  you  may  see  when  resting  time  comes.  God  bless  that 
evening,  and  give  hope  of  a  glad  morning !  "  Alas,  his  "  Sab 
bath  of  Life  "  never  came !  It  was  the  full  clay's  work  to  the 
end.  But  was  there  not  with  it  the  hope  of  a  glad  morning? 

Sumner  was  in  Washington  at  the  time  of  the  inauguration 
of  General  Grant.  The  inaugural  address  was  brief  and 
characteristic.  It  was  very  emphatic,  on  the  two  questions  that 
had  been  most  discussed  in  the  campaign,  repudiation  and 
suffrage.  He  urged  the  exclusion  of  every  repudiator  from 
public  place  as  a  means  of  strengthening  the  public  credit ;  and 
the  settlement  of  the  suffrage  question,  likely  to  be  agitated  so 
long  as  a  portion  of  the  citizens  was  excluded  from  the  fran 
chise  in  any  State,  by  the  ratification  of  the  Fifteenth  Amend 
ment  to  the  Constitution.  The  declaration,  in  his  inaugural, 
of  most  interest  to  us,  in  the  light  of  the  President's  subsequent 
contest  with  Sumner  over  San  Domingo,  was,  that  on  all  sub 
jects  he  should  have  "  a  policy  to  recommend,  but  none  to  en 
force  against  the  will  of  the  people  ".  He  probably  meant  this 
statement  in  all  candor,  but  in  reference  to  the  course  that  had 
been  pursued  by  President  Johnson,  which  had  rendered  his 
"  policy  "  so  obnoxious,  as  to  be  still  fresh  in  the  public  recol- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  613 

lection.  It  was  so  fresh  also  in  the  recollection  of  General 
Grant,  by  reason  of  Johnson's  effort  to  place  him  in  a  false  light, 
in  connection  with  the  removal  of  Secretary  Stanton  that,  con 
trary  to  the  almost  uniform  custom  since  the  foundation  of  the 
Eepublic,  he  would  not  recognize  Johnson  officially,  by  driving 
to  the  Inauguration  service  with  him  from  the  White  House. 

On  the  evening  of  the  Inauguration,  three  men  dined  together 
at  Sumner's  house  in  Washington.  At  the  time  they  were  fast 
friends  of  long  standing  and  of  similar  tastes.  All  were  men 
of  culture,  scholarly,  fond  of  each  other's  society,  and  of  the 
pleasures  of  good  cheer;  and  all  were  destined  to  a  permanent 
place  in  their  country's  history.  All  of  them  were  friends  of 
the  administration  just  inaugurated  and  looked  forward,  with 
bright  anticipations,  to  the  realization  of  the  best  hopes  of  the 
Republicans.  These  three  men  were  destined  soon  to  play  prin 
cipal  parts,  in  one  of  the  most  heated  contests  of  Grant's  ad 
ministration.  They  were  Sumner,  John  Lothrop  Motley,  the 
historian,  and  Hamilton  Fish,  soon  to  become  Grant's  Secretary 
of  State.  Little  did  they  then  think,  as  the  pleasant  com 
munion  passed  from  lip  to  lip,  at  this  hospitable  board,  that  one 
of  them,  doing  the  will  of  his  chief,  would  soon  become  the 
instrument  to  drive  both  the  others  from  coveted  places,  in  their 
country's  service,  estrange  them  from  their  party  and  leave 
sores  that  never  were  healed. 

Fish  did  not  then  know  that  he  was  to  be  a  member  of  Grant's 
Cabinet.  At  this  time,  the  President's  plans  were  otherwise. 
He  had  nominated  Alexander  T.  Stewart,  a  wealthy  merchant 
of  New  York  City,  for  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  If  he  had 
received  this  place,  it  would,  according  to  custom,  have  pre 
vented  the  appointment  of  any  other  Cabinet  officer  from  the 
State  of  New  York.  But  an  old  act  of  Congress  forbade  the 
appointment  of  any  one  interested  in  the  carrying  business  of 
trade  or  commerce,  to  the  position  of  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 
This  law  disqualified  Stewart.  The  President  did  not  know 
of  the  law,  when  this  nomination  was  made,  though  its  viola 
tion  was  punishable  by  a  fine  of  three  thousand  dollars  and 
removal  from  office  and  disqualification,  thereafter,  from  hold 
ing  any  position  under  the  Government.  The  position  was  an 
embarrassing  one.  When  it  was  brought  to  his  attention,  the 
President  frankly  admitted  his  ignorance  of  the  law,  but  being 
very  desirous  to  have  Mr.  Stewart  in  his  Cabinet  he  asked  that 
the  law  be  changed  so  as  to  allow  him  to  take  the  place.  Sher 
man  asked  unanimous  consent  of  the  Senate  to  introduce  such 
a  bill,  but  Sumner's  voice  promptly  arrested  the  measure.  He 
suggested  that  such  a  step  ought  to  be  carefully  considered  be- 


614  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

fore  it  was  taken.  The  bill  was  not  called  up  again,  a  private 
canvass  having  disclosed  that  the  Senators  upon  reflection, 
were  generally  against  it.  The  President  then  withdrew  the 
appointment  and  nominated  George  S.  Boutwell  of  Massa 
chusetts. 

The  President  at  the  commencement  of  his  administration 
had  sent  to  the  Senate  the  name  of  Elihu  B.  Washburn  for  Sec 
retary  of  State.  For  sixteen  years,  he  had  represented  in  Con 
gress  the  Galena  district  of  Illinois.  At  the  opening  of  the 
war  Grant  resided  in  this  district  and  Washburn  ever  since  had 
been  his  faithful  friend.  Upon  the  failure  of  the  President  to 
secure  A.  T.  Stewart  of  New  York  for  his  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  Mr.  Washburn  resigned  and  was  appointed  Minister  to 
France  and  Hamilton  Fish  was  appointed  Secretary  of  State. 
He  was  the  only  member  of  Grant's  Cabinet,  appointed  at  this 
time,  that  continued  with  him  to  the  end  of  his  administration. 
Cabinet  changes  during  his  Presidency  were  frequent.  The 
President  "himself,  with  his  strong  personality,  was  the  domi 
nating  spirit  of  his  administration  and  a  man  of  like  character 
was  not  continued  long  in  his  official  family.  Fish  was  not  of 
this  disposition. 

He  was  a  member  of  one  of  the  old  Knickerbocker  families 
of  New  York  City.  He  had  inherited  large  wealth  as  well  as  a 
companionable  disposition.  He  was  singularly  fortunate  in  his 
marriage  to  a  refined  and  intelligent  lady,  who  united  with 
him  in  making  their  home  one  of  elegant  hospitality.  He  had 
served  in  both  Houses  of  the  New  York  Legislature,  a  term 
in  each  House  of  Congress  and  one  as  Governor  of  New  York. 
His  career  in  these  offices  had  not  been  distinguished,  but  was 
characterized  by  good  sense  and  the  genial  character  of  the 
man. 

He  entered  the  Senate  the  same  day  Sumner  did  and  they  were 
soon  warm  friends.  Without  a  home  of  his  own,  the  refined 
hospitality  dispensed  at  that  of  Fish,  where  he  was  always,  till 
this  time,  a  welcome  guest,  appealed  strongly  to  Sumner.  No 
where  in  Washington  was  he  entertained  so  often  or  with  so 
much  cordiality.  After  Fish's  retirement  from  the  Senate 
this  intimacy  continued  at  his  homes  in  New  York  and  on  the 
Hudson ;  and  while  Sumner  was  in  Europe,  in  search  of  health 
after  the  Brooks  assault,  he  saw  much  of  them  in  Paris,  where 
their  daughters  were  in  school.  During  all  these  years,  fre 
quent  and  cordial  letters  passed  between  him  and  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
Fish  and  their  children,  and  kindly  messages  were  exchanged 
upon  interesting  changes  in  their  family.  When  the  Fishes 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  015 

went  to  Europe,  in  1858,  they  carried  letters  from  Sumner  to 
some  of  his  European  friends,  a  favor  he  rarely  granted. 

After  his  retirement  from  the  Senate,  in  1857,  until  called 
to  the  Cabinet  in  1869,  Fish  held  no  public  office  and,  with  the 
facility  of  his  disposition,  seemed  to  have  little  interest,  in  the 
important  events  that  were  transpiring  in  the  political  world. 
His  hospitality,  extended  to  General  Grant,  in  New  York,  had 
brought  them  together  and  led  to  his  selection  for  the  Cabinet. 
He  was  then  sixty  years  of  age  and  accepted  and,  for  the  first 
year,  retained  the  office,  with  some  reluctance.  Thereafter 
the  place  became  more  congenial  to  him.  His  appointment  was 
very  agreeable  to  Sumner.  Fish  relied  upon  Sumner  to  counsel 
him  about  appointments  and  questions  of  difficulty,  arising  in 
the  Department,  and  even  sent  copies  of  dispatches  from  our 
Ministers  to  him,  when  in  Boston,  so  that  he  might  have  the 
benefit  of  his  advice.  This  unusually  cordial  relation  con 
tinued,  until  the  San  Domingo  controversy  arose. 

The  other  guest  at  Sumner's  table  the  evening  of  the  Inaug 
uration,  John  Lothrop  Motley,  was  a  native  of  Dorchester, 
Massachusetts,  now  a  part  of  Boston.  He  graduated  at  Har 
vard,  in  the  same  class  with  Sumner's  eloquent  co-laborer  in  the 
anti-slavery  cause,  Wendell  Phillips.  It  was  the  class  follow 
ing  Sumner's.  Motley  studied  law  and  was  admitted  to  the 
Massachusetts  bar,  practised  for  some  time  in  Boston  and  was 
elected  a  Member  of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature,  in  1849. 
His  wife  was  a  sister  of  Park  Benjamin,  with  whom  and 
another  sister,  she  made  her  home  in  Boston,  prior  to  her  mar 
riage.  Sumner  was,  at  the  time,,  a  frequent  caller,  at  their 
house.  Inspired  with  the  purpose  of  writing  his  Netherland 
histories,  Motley  went  to  Europe  in  1851,  where  the  balance  of 
his  life  was  mostly  spent.  His  history  of  the  Rise  of  the  Dutch 
Republic  was  published  in  London,  in  1856,  and  it  immediately 
raised  him  to  fame  and  popularity  in  England.  He  was  in 
London  during  the  seasons  of  1858,  1859  and  1860  and  was 
much  sought  for,  and  was  entertained  by  the  best  society. 
Realizing  the  want  of  knowledge,  in  England,  of  the  real  causes 
of  our  troubles,  at  the  opening  of  hostilities,  he  wrote  a  letter  to 
the  London  Times,  afterwards  singularly  influential  as  a 
pamphlet,  explaining  clearly  and  elaborately  the  nature  of  the 
Union  and  the  causes  of  the  war. 

He  was  made  Minister  to  Austria,  by  President  Lincoln,  in 
1861,  and  he  continued  there  till  1867,  occupying  himself  large 
ly,  with  promoting  a  right  knowledge,  in  Europe,  of  American 
conditions  and  the  aims  of  the  Union  party.  He  was  recalled 
by  President  Johnson  and  returning  to  the  United  States,  he 


61 G  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

took  part  in  the  campaign  for  the  election  of  Grant.  A  bril 
liant  speech  for  the  Republican  cause,  by  the  historian  of 
William  the  Silent,  describing  the  candidates  and  urging 
Grant's  election,  appealed  strongly  to  him.  Motley  met  Grant 
frequently  afterwards,  when  a  genial  cigar  together  cemented  a 
pleasant  acquaintance  and  prepossessed  Grant  in  his  favor. 
Fish  also  had  met  him  in  New  York,  liked  him  and  had  intro 
duced  him  on  the  occasion  of  a  lecture.  The  influential  parties 
were  thus  prepossessed  in  his  favor,  when  Sumner  recommended 
him  for  Minister  to  England.  He  received  the  appointment  on 
April  twelfth,  a  month  after  Fish  entered  the  State  Depart 
ment.  Simmer's  especial  desire  in  the  distribution  of  the 
Foreign  Missions  was  to  get  that  to  Greece  for  his  friend  Dr. 
Samuel  G.  Howe  of  Boston.  The  President  wished  to  appoint 
Motley  and  he,  being  credited  to  Boston,  naturally  barred  Howe. 


CHAPTER  XXXYIII 

EULOGIES   ON   THADDEUS  STEVENS   AND  WM.   P.   FESSENDEN AN 

EDITION    OF    HIS    WORKS CHANGES    IN    THE    NATURALIZA 
TION  LAWS EQUAL  RIGHTS RECONSTRUCTION   COMPLETED 

AT  the  opening  of  Congress,  in  December,  1868,  one  Mem 
ber  was  wanting,  who  had  been  a  familiar  figure  there  since 
Sumner's  first  entrance  to  the  Senate.  This  was  Thaddeus 
Stevens.  He  was  born  in  Vermont,  but  had  entered  the  House, 
in  1848,  from  Pennsylvania,  where  he  had  already  distinguished 
himself,  as  a  lawyer,  and  by  a  long  service  in  the  Legislature. 
He  had  advocated  an  efficient  system  of  common  schools,  with 
such  success  that  Sumner  declared  there  was  not  a  child  in 
Pennsylvania  "  conning  a  spelling-book  beneath  the  rafters 
of  a  village  school,  who  did  not  owe  him  gratitude  ".  He  was 
early  known,  in  the  House,  as  a  pronounced  enemy  of  slavery 
and  a  bold  advocate  of  equal  rights.  For  vigorous  and  trench 
ant  oratory  he  had  few  equals.  "  Speech  was  with  him  at 
times  a  cat-o-nine  tails  and  woe  to  the  victim  on  whom  the 
terrible  lash  descended."  He  was  not  less  distinctly  a  man  of 
action,  fearless  and  uncompromising  in  his  fight  for  equal 
rights,  and  he  fought  slavery  to  its  death.  But  when  the  fight 
was  over,  when  slavery  was  abolished  and  equal  suffrage  secured, 
worn  out  by  his  tremendous  efforts,  "  he  laid  down  his  load  of 
work  and  disease  to  put  on  immortality."  Sumner  commem 
orated  him  in  the  Senate  at  the  memorial  service,  emphasizing 
the  heroic  qualities  of  the  man.  In  fearless,  direct  and  vigorous 
advocacy,  of  what  both  believed  was  right,  there  was  much  in 
common  between  them. 

Sumner  was  soon  called  to  perform  the  same  office  for  one 
of  his  colleagues.  Senator  William  Pitt  Fessenden  took  part 
in  the  first  session  of  Congress  under  President  Grant,  but  it 
was  his  last  public  service.  He  died  on  the  eighth  day  of  Sep 
tember,  1869.  He  had  been  another  of  Sumner's  early  co- 
laborers  in  the  anti-slavery  cause.  When  he  entered  the  Senate, 
in  1855,  it  was  during  the  struggle  over  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
Bill.  In  the  Senate  there  were  just  fourteen  members,,  who 
stood  for  freedom,  while  thirty-seven  were  ready  to  repeal  the 
Compromise  that  stood  as  a  time-honored  landmark,  and  to 
open  that  vast  region  to  slavery.  His  coming  seemed  like 

617 


(318  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

a  reinforcement  on  the  field  of  battle.  The  friends  of  free 
dom  were  no  longer  fourteen,  but  fifteen.  Coming  from  the 
other  House,  he  was  armed  at  all  points  for  the  fight.  He  at 
once  took  part  in  the  debate  where  his  directness  and  his  quick 
ness  at  repartee  were  soon  apparent.  A  threat  of  secession,  by  a 
Southerner,  while  he  was  speaking,  met  the  prompt  response: 
"  Do  not  delay  it  on  my  account ;  do  not  delay  it  on  account 
of  anybody  at  the  North  ".  Others  still  interrupted,  only  to  be 
worsted.  "  The  effect,"  Sumner  declared,  "  was  electric  "... 
He  added,  "  The  '  Globe '  could  not  picture  the  exciting  scene, 
—the  Senator  from  Maine  erect,  firm,  immovable  as  a  jutting 
promontory  against  which  the  waves  of  Ocean  tossed  and  broke 
in  dissolving  spray.  There  he  stood.  Not  a  Senator,  loving 
Freedom,  who  did  not  feel  on  that  day  that  a  champion  had 
come."  The  place  Fessenden  took  in  the  Senate  that  day,  he 
maintained  to  the  end.  No  one  in  the  Senate  could  match  him 
for  directness  of  argument,  "  for  immediate  and  incisive  reply." 
"  He  shot  flying,"  said  Sumner,  "  and  with  unerring  aim." 

Sumner  contrasted  the  Senate  as  it  was  in  the  early  days  of 
the  Eepublic.  It  was  then  described,  as  the  only  assembly  in 
the  Union,  where  eloquence  was  obtrusive  and  every  one  de 
livered  his  opinion  concisely — one  leg  over  the  other — where 
speech  was  for  business  and  immediate  effect.  Under  the  trans 
forming  influence  of  such  men,  it  had  become  a  centre  from 
which  to  address  the  country.  "  A  seat  here,"  Sumner  de 
clared,  "  is  a  lofty  pulpit  with  a  mighty  sounding  board  and  the 
whole,  wide-spread  people  is  the  congregation." 

Sumner  spoke  of  Fessenden's  integrity,  his  fidelity,  his  con 
stant  watchfulness  of  the  public  interest.  He  dwelt  on  his  serv 
ices  as  chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Senate 
during  the  war,  when  immense  sums  were  being  appropriated 
and  the  receipts  and  expenditures  were  both  then  under  its 
control  and  yet,  so  closely  was  the  Treasury  watched  by  him, 
that  nothing  was  added  to  or  taken  from  it,  without  his  knowl 
edge.  "  All,"  he  said,  "  that  our  best  generals  were  in  arms,  he 
was  in  the  financial  field." 

Sumner  and  Fessenden  had  not  been  warm  friends.  Each 
appreciated  the  other,  each  supported  the  same  party  and  the 
same  measures.  But  both  were  leaders  and  sharp  encounters 
sometimes  took  place  between  them.  As  Sumner  suggested, 
"men  are  tempted  by  the  talent  they  possess."  Fessenden 
"once  engaged,  yielded  to  the  excitement  of  the  moment  and 
the  joy  of  conflict"  and  sometimes,  perhaps,  said  more  than 
he  intended.  "  His  words  warmed,  as  the  Olympic  wheel 
caught  fire  in  the  swiftness  of  the  race."  But  Sumner  added, 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  619 

"  if  on  these  occasions  there  were  sparkles  which  fell  where 
they  should  not  have  fallen,  they  cannot  be  remembered  now." 

It  was  a  generous  eulogy.  Sumner  was  at  his  best.  And  Fes 
senden's  friends  were  grateful  in  their  acknowledgments  of  it. 
Little  did  either  then  realize  what  a  loss  Sumner  had  sustained 
in  Fessenden's  death.  In  the  struggles  which  followed  with 
Grant,  Fessenden's  strong  sense  of  justice,  his  independence,  his 
high  appreciation  of  Sumner's  abilities,  would  have  interposed 
to  prevent  him  being  driven,  from  the  Chairmanship  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations,  by  a  mere  gust  of  temper  on 
the  part  of  those  in  authority.  It  was  felt  that  Fessenden's 
influence  in  the  Senate,  was  sufficient  to  have  prevented  it,  if 
he  had  lived. 

But  the  Senate  was  changing.  Summer's  old  colleagues  were 
passing  away.  The  position  of  senior  Senator  in  continuous 
service  which  he  now  held  brought  many  reflections  with  it.  He 
was  not  yet  old  in  years — only  fifty-seven.  His  mother  had 
lived  to  be  eighty-one ;  his  father  was  sixty-three  when  he  died. 
With  Sumner's  splendid  physical  endowment,  much  like  his 
mother's,  he  might  have  hoped,  under  other  circumstances,  that 
his  life  would  be  continued  to  a  good  old  age.  But  his  days  had 
been  passed  too  much  in  the  storm  and  stress  of  the  most  ex 
citing  period  of  American  history.  The  toil,  and  suffering, 
both  physical  and  mental,  that  he  had  endured,  were  telling 
upon  him.  He  felt  old  age  creeping  on  and  realized  that  he 
must  be  putting  his  house  in  order.  With  the  system  that  had 
characterized  his  whole  life,  he  set  about  it. 

In  1869,  he  commenced  the  publication  of  a  complete  edition 
of  his  works.  He  had  contemplated  such  an  edition  for  several 
years.  There  had  been  a  collection  of  his  earlier  speeches  pub 
lished  and  generally  sold,  but  this  was  exhausted  and  his  friends 
urged  him  to  issue  a  new  and  complete  one.  There  was  a 
demand  frequently  for  copies  of  his  speeches  which  were  out 
of  print  and  could  not  be  furnished.  Many  of  them  had  been 
prepared  with  great  labor  and  embodied  the  result  of  much  care 
ful  research.  They  had  been  received,  at  the  time  of  their  de 
livery,  in  terms  of  high  commendation,  by  the  press  and  by 
prominent  men  and  were  regarded  as  having  a  permanent  value 
for  the  matter  which  they  contained  as  well  as  for  the  finished 
form  in  which  they  appeared.  They  contained  the  thought  of 
one  of  the  chief  actors,  in  a  most  important  period  of  history. 
They  were  specimens  of  eloquence  that  were  hardly  surpassed  in 
the  English  language  for  beauty  of  expression  and  permanent 
effect,  some  of  them  being  inseparably  connected  with  the  fall 
of  slavery,  as  the  speech  which  preceded  the  assault  by  Brooks. 


620  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

A  right  understanding  of  the  assault  could  not  be  had  without 
reading  the  speech  and  yet  that  assault  made  a  permanent  im 
pression  upon  the  country.  Sumner's  own  fame  as  one  of  the 
first  orators  of  his  country  had  become  widely  extended  and  he 
naturally  felt  an  interest  in  perpetuating  it,  by  leaving  these 
speeches  in  such  form  as  would  render  them' accessible  to  future 
generations. 

He  wrote  his  friend,  Dr.  Samuel  G.  Howe :  "  Latterly  I  have 
been  led  to  think  more  than  ever  of  the  uncertainty  of  life. 
Perhaps  the  little  interest  I  have  in  it  has  made  me  notice 
symptoms  that  in  a  gayer  mood  I  might  have  neglected.  Suf 
fice  it  to  say  that  I  have  now  but  one  solicitude, — it  is  to  print 
a  revised  edition  of  my  speeches  before  I  die.  If  this  were 
done  I  should  be  ready  to  go.  These  speeches  are  my  life.  As 
a  connected  series  they  will  illustrate  the  progress  of  the  great 
battle  with  slavery,  and  what  I  have  done  in  it.  I  hope  it 
is  not  unpardonable  in  me  to  desire  to  see  them  together, 
especially  as  I  have  nothing  else." 

To  accomplish  this  work  in  the  manner  proposed  made  it 
no  slight  task  for  one  of  Sumner's  years.  His  model  was  the 
American  edition  of  Burke's  works;  but  it  was  to  be  more 
elaborately  done.  The  speeches  were  to  have  an  accurate  in 
troduction  explaining  the  circumstances  under  which  the  speech 
was  delivered,  and  the  occasion  of  it.  The  text  of  the  speech 
was  to  be  carefully  corrected,  if  need  be,  the  language  changed 
to  convey  the  thought  more  clearly,  and  notes  added,  so  as  to 
give  the  authorities  relied  on;  and  the  whole  followed  by  an 
appendix,  explaining  circumstances  which  followed  the  speech, 
perhaps  the  farther  debate  and  vote,  quoting  the  press  com 
ments  and  his  correspondence  upon  it.  As  he  was  accustomed 
to  frank  copies  of  his  speeches  after  delivery,  to  the  press  and 
his  friends,  naturally  the  comments  and  correspondence  were 
of  some  length.  In  some  instances,  this  introduction  and 
the  appendix  of  a  speech  would  occupy,  as  in  that  preceding 
the  Brooks  assault,  more  than  a  hundred  pages  of  closely 
printed  matter.  The  care  with  which  it  was  done  and  the 
research  required,  tempted  him  to  great  labor,  to  give  the 
edition  the  finished  form  he  desired.  When  he  had  completed 
the  first  two  volumes,  he  wrote  Longfellow,  it  would  have  been 
as  easy  to  re-write  the  speeches  as  to  edit  them.  The  purpose 
was  to  include  the  whole  in  eight  volumes,  the  set  to  be  com 
pleted  in  one  or  two  more,  containing  a  biography,  written  by 
another.  But  it  far  exceeded  this,  running  to  fifteen  volumes 
of  about  five  hundred  pages  each,  without  the  biography.  He 
did  not  live  to  see  it  completed.  It  was  a  greater  work  than  he 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  621 

anticipated,  requiring  time  that  at  his  age  should  have  been 
given  to  rest,  overtaxing  his  strength  and  troubling  the  last 
hours  of  his  life.  The  part  of  the  work  up  to  the  four  hun 
dredth  and  sixty-seventh  page  of  the  tenth  volume  and  the 
monograph,  "  Prophetic  voices  concerning  America  "  contained 
in  the  twelfth,  which  he  was  preparing  for  separate  publica 
tion,  were  completed  under  his  direction.  He  also  furnished 
notes  for  the  eleventh  volume.  But  the  remaining  work  was 
done  under  the  direction  of  his  executors.  The  first  volume 
came  from  the  press,  in  1870 ;  the  last,  not  until  1883. 

This  work,  while  too  large  for  a  popular  edition  and  contain 
ing  much  of  little  interest  to  the  general  reader,  is  of  great 
value  to  one  who  wishes  to  make  a  careful  study  of  Sumner's 
life.  The  introductions  and  appendices  and  the  notes  to  the 
speeches,  especially  in  the  volumes  prepared  under  Sumner's 
own  eye,  are  of  great  value  and  show  in  small  compass  and 
with  great  accuracy  his  part  in  the  affairs  to  which  the  speeches 
relate. 

The  expense  connected  with  the  work  was  considerable.  An 
accomplished  proof-reader  was  engaged,  who  made  verbal  criti 
cisms,  verified  the  notes  and  carried  the  volumes  through  the 
press.  No  expense  was  spared  to  make  the  work  as  nearly 
perfect  as  it  could  be.  Sumner  assumed  the  financial  re 
sponsibility  for  it  and  he,  and  his  executors  after  his  death, 
secured  the  copyrights.  The  publishing  was  by  Lee  and  Shep- 
ard  of  Boston  and,  in  printing  and  binding  as  well  as  mate 
rial,  the  work  is  a  model  of  excellence.  It  was  sold  by  sub 
scription.  A  special  edition,  each  set  containing  the  autograph 
of  Sumner,  was  sold  at  an  advanced  price,  mostly  to  his  per 
sonal  friends;  the  last  volume  of  the  work  contains  the  names 
of  the  subscribers  to  this  autograph  edition.  But  the  burden 
of  expense  was  felt  by  Sumner.  At  times  he  thought  of  giving 
up  his  house  in  Washington,  to  reduce  his  expenditures,  so  as 
to  devote  his  means  to  this  object,  but  this  had  become  such  a 
source  of  comfort,  at  his  time  of  life,  for  one  in  his  position 
and  he  felt  the  need  of  it  so  much,  that  he  could  not  make  the 
sacrifice.  The  work  was  a  considerable  drain  upon  his  moder 
ate  estate. 

To  raise  the  funds  to  meet  these  expenses  of  house  and 
"  works  "  he  continued  his  expedient  of  lecturing,  during  the 
recesses  of  Congress.  In  the  summer  of  1869,  he  prepared  a 
lecture  on  "  The  Question  of  Caste  "  which  he  delivered  first 
in  Boston  on  October  twenty-first  and  subsequently  at  numer 
ous  places,  in  New  England,  and  in  the  States  of  Pennsylvania, 
New  Jersey,  Delaware  and  New  York.  The  lecture  revealed 


622  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

his  wealth  of  learning  and  customary  care  in  preparation  and 
gave  many  historical  illustrations  of  class  distinctions,  in  the 
population  of  semi-civilized  countries.  He  argued  that  caste, 
wherever  it  existed,  was  a  relic  of  barbarism  and  should 
be  abolished.  He  had  now  advanced  to  this  position,  in  the 
Senate,  in  the  treatment  of  the  rights  of  the  f  reedmen  and  was 
insisting  upon  the  absolute  civil  and  political  equality  of  all 
men.  He  had  spoken  on  the  subject,  at  the  previous  session, 
when  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  was  under 
consideration  and  had  offered  a  substitute  for  it,  which  he  be 
lieved  would  more  effectually  promote  this  purpose,  by  adding 
some  criminal  penalties  to  the  denial  of  the  right  to  vote  or 
hold  office  under  the  pretence  of  race  or  color.  This  substitute, 
however,  was  rejected.  His  purpose  in  the  lecture,  aside  from 
financial  gain,  was  to  create  and  develop  a  sentiment  in  favor 
of  equal  rights.  Nothing,  he  argued,  could  ever  be  settled,  that 
was  not  right,  and  there  could  be  no  settlement  of  this  ques 
tion  except  in  harmony  with  the  principles  he  advocated.  <:  As 
all  rivers  are  lost  in  the  sea,  which  shows  no  sign  of  their 
presence  "  so,  he  insisted,  must  all  nationalities,  English,  Ger 
man,  African  or  Chinese,  within  the  confines  of  our  Eepublic 
be  lost  in  one  harmonious  citizenship,  where  all  are  equal  in 
rights. 

In  Congress,  Sumner  sought  to  have  the  naturalization  laws 
amended  by  striking  out  the  word  "  white ",  wherever  it  oc 
curred,  so  that  in  the  admission  of  foreign  born  persons  to  our 
citizenship,  there  should  be  no  distinction  of  race  or  color.  The 
bill  he  introduced  for  this  purpose,  was  referred  to  the  Judi 
ciary  Committee,  where  it  remained  until  near  the  end  of  the 
session,  when  it  was  reported  adversely.  In  March,  1869,  he  in 
troduced  it  again.  The  committee  again  retained  it,  this  time 
for  more  than  a  year,  when  it  was  reported  favorably.  On  the 
second  and  fourth  days  of  July,  1870,  he  spoke  upon  it  and 
advocated  its  passage.  He  was  opposed  by  some  Republicans, 
who  asked  him  not  to  press  it  to  a  vote,  because  they  did  not 
wish  to  go  on  record  as  voting  for  or  against  it.  But  he  re 
minded  them  of  other  days,  when  he  had  been  asked  not  to 
press  questions  to  a  vote.  He  insisted  now,  as  then,  that  the 
question  should  be  settled  justly  and  it  would  be  settled  finally 
that  from  1867  till  now,  he  was  unable  to  have  a  vote  upon  it 
and  when  at  last  he  had  reached  a  vote  he  was  asked  to  post 
pone  it  to  some  "  to-morrow  ".  With  some  impatience  he  ex 
claimed  : 

"To-morrow,  and  to-morrow,  and  to-morrow 
Creeps  in  this  petty  pace  from  day  to  day. 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMMER  623 

To  the  last  syllable  of  recorded  time ; 
And  all  our  yesterdays  have  lighted  fools 
The  way  to  dusty  death." 

I  will  not  postpone  this  question  to  any  ' to-morrow ' !  " 

His  bill  was  also  opposed  by  some  Senators  who  lived  on  the 
Pacific  coast,  because  it  would  admit  the  Chinese  to  citizenship. 
But  he  still  answered  that  his  bill  only  dealt  justly  with  all 
men,  negro  as  well  as  Chinese.  His  amendment,  however,  was 
rejected ;  a  motion  to  reconsider  the  vote  carried,  but  it  was  re 
jected  again.  An  amendment  was  then  offered  to  extend  the 
naturalization  laws  to  aliens  of  African  nativity  and  to  persons 
of  African  descent;  and  it  carried,  Sumner  voting  for  it,  al 
though  he  believed  the  exclusion  of  the  Chinese  to  be  unjust. 

On  the  eighth  of  April,  1870,  in  reply  to  an  invitation  to  be 
present  at  the  last  meeting  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  So 
ciety,  which  proposed  to  disband  considering  its  work  as  finished, 
after  having  secured  the  abolition  of  slavery  and  equal  rights  at 
the  ballot-box,  he  declared  that  he  could  not  consider  the  work 
as  finished,  so  long  as  the  word  "  white  "  was  allowed  to  play 
any  part  in  legislation  or  rule  public  conveyances  or  bar  the 
doors  of  hotels,  or  houses  of  amusement  or  schools,  that  the 
complete  equality  of  all,  before  the  law,  must  first  be  secured. 
He  was  opposed  to  class  disabilities. 

At  the  same  time  he  urged  that  there  should  be  no  exclusion 
of  retired  army  officers  from  civil  office.  He  argued  that  the 
half  pay  they  enjoyed  must  be  considered  as  a  pension  and  not 
as  pay  for  employment,  that  it  was  unfair  to  these  men,  having 
no  work,  to  be  excluded  from  the  civil  service,  if  qualified. 

Another  instance  of  Sumner's  devotion  to  these  principles 
occurred  at  about  this  time.  It  illustrates  his  courage  in  main 
taining  a  position  that  he  believed  to  be  right  in  the  face  of  an 
adverse  majority  and  a  misguided  public  sentiment.  There 
had  been  some  disagreement  between  our  government  and 
foreign  nations  as  to  the  right  of  the  citizens  of  these  nations 
to  dissolve  their  relations  with  them  and  become  naturalized 
citizens  of  our  country.  Some  of  these  naturalized  citizens 
upon  returning  to  their  native  countries  were  arrested  and 
held,  for  a  compliance  with  their  laws  of  citizenship.  To 
remedy  this  evil  a. bill  was  passed  by  the  House  fixing  the  right 
of  foreign  born  persons  to  dissolve  their  relation  to  their  mother 
countries  and  become  naturalized  citizens  of  ours.  But  to  this 
very  proper  provision  it  was  added,  that  if  it  became  known  to 
the  President,  that  any  of  these  naturalized  citizens  were  ar 
rested  and  detained,  by  any  foreign  government,  in  contra- 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

vention  of  our  laws,  and  their  release  was  unreasonably  de 
layed,  the  President  was  authorized  to  retaliate  by  suspending 
commercial  relations  with  the  foreign  government,  thus  offend 
ing,  or  to  arrest  and  detain  in  custody  any  subject  of  that 
government,  found  within  our  country  except  ambassadors  and 
other  public  ministers  and  their  domestics. 

No  one  questioned  the  right  of  our  government  to  maintain 
that  a  foreign  subject  could  thus  dissolve  his  relation  to  his 
mother  country  and  become  a  citizen  of  ours.  Both  the  polit 
ical  parties  had  recognized  it,  in  their  platforms.  England  and 
Germany  were  recognizing  it  abroad.  But  the  proposed 
remedy,  by  the  suspension  of  commerce  or  the  arrest  of  foreign 
citizens  here,  was  monstrous.  Yet  a  bill  with  these  provisions 
in  it  passed  the  House,  under  pressure  of  the  Fenian  move 
ment.  The  wrongfulness  of  it  was  pointed  out,  but  the  flexibil 
ity  of  the  Members  appeared  when,  for  fear  of  offending  this 
element  of  our  citizens,  one  hundred  and  four  voted  for  it  and 
only  four  against  it ;  seventy-nine  did  not  vote.  Some  Members 
voted  for  it,  though  opposed  to  it,  trusting  that  it  would  be 
killed  in  the  Senate.  When  one  of  these  was  asked  how  he 
could  vote  for  such  a  monstrous  proposition,  he  answered :  "  It 
was  of  no  account ;  I  knew  Sumner  would  put  his  foot  on  it." 

He  did  put  his  foot  on  it,  but  their  conduct  was  none  the 
less  discreditable.  In  the  Senate  it  was  referred  to  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  of  which  he  was  Chairman.  Not 
withstanding  a  pressure  to  have  it  reported  earlier,  he  held  it 
there  for  two  months  to  allow  time  for  reflection,  and  then 
reported  the  bill,  with  an  amendment  leaving  out  the  clause, 
authorizing  the  suspension  of  commercial  relations  and  re 
prisals  on  private  persons,  and  substituting  for  it  a  clause  mak 
ing  it  the  duty  of  the  President  to  report  to  Congress  the  cir 
cumstances  of  the  arrest  of  our  citizens  and  any  proceedings 
for  their  release,  so  that  Congress  could  take  prompt  action  to 
secure  to  everyone  his  just  rights.  Every  member  of  his 
Committee  concurred  in  this  report. 

In  the  Senate,  Sumner  declared  that  by  the  law  of  nations, 
private  individuals  could  not  be  held  responsible  for  the  act  of 
their  government  and  that  this  provision  against  them  meant, 
that  Charles  Dickens,  or  Anthony  Trollope,  or  Rev.  Newman 
Hall,  trustful  travellers  and  honored  guests  in  our  country, 
might  be  seized  and  imprisoned  at  the  nod  of  the  President,  to 
the  great  shame  of  the  country.  It  would  make  good  men 
liable  to  suffer  for  acts,  in  which  they  took  no  part,  and  he 
could  liken  it  to  nothing  better,  than  "  the  revival  of  the 
Priigel-knabe,  who  was  kept  at  the  German  courts  of  former 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  625 

days,  to  receive  the  stripes  which  the  prince  had  merited  for 
his  misdeeds." 

The  Senate  rejected  these  retaliatory  provisions,  in  the 
House  bill,  by  a  vote  of  thirty  to  seven.  But  a  substitute  was 
moved,  for  the  provision  inserted  by  Sumner's  Committee,  re 
quiring  the  President,  whenever  one  of  our  citizens  was  unjustly 
deprived  of  his  liberty,  to  use  such  means,  not  amounting  to 
acts  of  war,  as  he  may  think  proper,  to  obtain  his  release. 
Sumner  opposed  this  amendment  as  conferring  too  great  power 
on  the  President.  On  the  other  side  it  was  said,  that  "  the  law 
as  proposed  to  be  passed  under  the  direction  of  the  honorable 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  amounts  to 
nothing  "  and  Conness  of  California  charged  Sumner  with  in 
difference  to  the  rights  of  foreign  born  citizens,  except  those 
of  African  descent.  Sumner  replied,  calling  his  attention  to 
the  fact  that  when  Know-Nothingism  prevailed  and  enveloped 
Massachusetts,  opposing  the  naturalization  and  adoption  of 
foreigners  as  American  citizens,  he  had  gone  down  to  Faneuil 
Hall  and,  in  the  presence  of  one  of  the  largest  audiences  ever 
assembled  there,  demanded  the  same  protection  and  privileges 
for  everyone,  Irish,  German,  African  or  Chinese  as  he  did  now. 
The  substitute  carried  and  the  bill,  as  thus  amended,  passed. 
Sumner,  however,  voted  against  it,  though  urged  for  political 
reasons  to  support  it. 

In  the  Senate  on  the  twenty-first  day  of  January,  1870,  a 
controversy  took  place  between  Sumner  and  Trumbull  of  Il 
linois  over  reconstruction.  In  the  heat  of  it  Trumbull  ques 
tioned  Sumner's  record  on  this  question,  taking  him  to  task  for 
his  absence  on  the  night  of  the  passage  of  the  Act  of  1867,  re 
quiring  equal  suffrage  as  one  of  the  conditions,  when  Sumner 
left  the  Chamber  at  midnight,  before  the  vote  was  taken,  but 
after  the  success  of  the  measure  was  assured.  It  will  be  remem 
bered  that  Sumner  was  the  first  to  engraft  equal  suffrage  for 
the  colored  race  on  that  bill,  as  an  essential  condition  of  the 
return  of  the  States  in  rebellion.  Sumner  took  little  notice  of 
the  thrust  on  that  day.  He  did  say: 

"  I  have  no  taste  for  controversy ;  much  rather  would  I  give 
the  little  of  strength  that  now  remains  for  me  to  the  direct 
advocacy  of  those  great  principles  to  which  my  life  in  humble 
measure  has  been  dedicated,  not  forgetting  any  of  my  other 
duties  as  a  Senator.  If  I  have  in  any  respect  failed,  I  regret 
it.  Let  me  say  in  all  simplicity,  I  have  done  much  less  than 
I  wish  I  had.  I  have  failed  often, — oh,  how  often ! — when  I 
wish  I  had  prevailed.  No  one  can  regret  it  more  than  I.  But 


626  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

I  have  been  constant  and  earnest  always.  Such,  God  willing, 
such  I  mean  to  be  to  the  end." 

This  occurred  when  the  admission  of  Virginia  was  under  con 
sideration.  .A  few  days  later,  when  the  admission  of  Mississippi 
was  before  the  Senate,  Stewart,  of  Nevada,  returned  to  the 
subject,  in  an  acrimonious  speech,  denying  Sumner's  author 
ship  of  the  provision  for  colored  suffrage,  in  the  Act  of  1867. 
When  he  concluded  Sumner,  unwilling  to  remain  silent  longer, 
reviewed  the  record  at  some  length,  commencing  as  early  as 
1862  and  quoting,  to  show  the  different  steps  of  the  controversy 
and  how  constantly  he  had  been  in  the  front  of  the  movement 
for  equal  suffrage.  As  the  ground  has  already  been  gone  over 
in  these  pages  it  is  needless  to  review  it  again. 

Sherman  of  Ohio,  who  was  a  Senator  during  the  whole  time 
in  question  and  an  active  participant  in  all  this  work,  was 
somewhat  impatient  at  the  consumption  of  time  over  the  ques 
tion.  He  said  that  Sumner's  record  on  it  was  made  long  before 
1867.  "  N~o  man  can  deny,"  he  added,  "  that  from  the  first 
and  I  think  the  very  first,  he  has  advocated  and  maintained  the 
necessity  of  giving  to  the  colored  people  of  the  Southern  States 
the  right  to  vote  *  *  *  Early  and  late  he  has  repeated  to  us 
the  necessity  of  conferring  suffrage  upon  the  colored  people 
of  the  South  as  the  basis  of  reconstruction.  I  think,  therefore, 
that  he  is  justified  in  stating  that  he  was  the  first  to  propose 
it  in  this  body.  *  *  *  In  my  judgment  it  would  be  just  as  well 
for  George  Washington  to  defend  himself  against  the  charge 
of  disloyalty  to  the  American  colonies,  for  whom  he  was  fight 
ing,  as  for  the  honorable  Senator  to  defend  his  record  on  this 
question." 

This  controversy  grew  out  of  the  reconstruction  of  Virginia, 
Texas,  Mississippi  and  Georgia.  The  first  three  of  these  States 
had  never  been  admitted  and  additional  conditions  were  now 
demanded.  The  depredations  of  the  Ku  Klux  Klan  and  other 
acts  of  outrage,  upon  loyal  citizens,  were  awaking  many  Repub 
licans  to  a  feeling  that  other  guarantees  should  be  required  of 
them.  Among  these  was  Sumner,  who  urged  that  the  Senate 
should  move  slowly  in  the  matter.  Three  Senators,  Stewart, 
Trumbull  and  Carpenter,  were  for  restoring  them  without  re 
quiring  any  conditions.  A  joint  resolution  was  offered  provid 
ing  for  the  admission  of  Virginia  unconditionally,  declaring 
she  had  complied  with  all  the  conditions  of  the  Reconstruction 
Acts.  This  was  amended  in  the  Senate  by  adding  a  requirement 
that  Members  of  the  Legislature  and  State  officers  of  Virginia 
should  take  an  oath  of  past  loyalty  or  of  the  removal  of  their 
disabilities.  Other  amendments  were  added  requiring  for  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLE8  SUMNER  627 

colored  people  equality  in  suffrage,  equality  in  eligibility  to 
office,  in  school  rights  and  privileges.  Sumner  strongly  advo 
cated  all  of  them  and  he  had  with  him  the  mass  of  the  Repub- 
licans.  But  the  three  Senators  named  opposed  them;  and  it 
was  over  them  the  clash  occurred.  Sumner  voted  for  all  the 
amendments,  but  refused  to  vote  for  the  resolution,  though 
the  amendments  all  carried.  He  believed  that  outrages  in  the 
South  were  becoming  so  frequent,  that  these  States  should,  for 
a  time,  be  continued  under  the  control  of  Congress.  But  the 
resolution  carried.  Mississippi  and  Texas  were  admitted  under 
the  same  conditions. 

The  Representatives  from  Georgia  had  been  admitted  to  the 
House  in  1868.  But  before  the  Senators  were  admitted,  her 
Legislature  had  expelled  all  its  colored  Members  on  the  ground 
that  they  were  disqualified  and  had  admitted,  to  their  places, 
white  persons,  whose  disabilities  were  not  yet  removed.  Other 
outrages  were  being  committed  there  upon  loyal  citizens.  It 
all  resulted  in  the  exclusion  of  her  Senators  and  the  expulsion 
of  her  Eepresentativcs  from  Congress.  She  was  now  seeking 
admission  again  and  was  the  last  State  to  receive  it.  A  proviso 
was  added  in  the  House  to  the  bill  for  her  admission,  making 
valid  the  title  of  her  State  officers  to  their  offices.  In  the 
Senate  this  proviso  was  opposed  by  Sumner.  She  was  finally 
required  to  readmit  the  colored  Members  to  their  seats  in  the 
Legislature  and  to  ratify  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  to  the 
Constitution  before  her  admission.  Hence  her  admission  did 
not  take  place  until  July  15,  1870.  This  completed  the  re 
construction  of  all  the  States  which  had  been  in  rebellion. 

The  proclamation  of  the  ratification  of  the  Fifteenth  Amend 
ment  was  issued  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  March,  1870.  The 
Legislatures  of  the  only  States  that  refused  to  ratify  it  were 
under  the  absolute  control  of  the  Democrats  and  every  member 
of  that  party  in  Congress  refused  to  vote  for  it.  But  the  req 
uisite  support  was  obtained  without  them.  Thus  equal  suf 
frage  became  a  part  of  the  fundamental  law  of  the  nation.  On 
the  evening  of  April  first,  a  large  crowd,  after  serenading  the 
President  and  Vice-President,  in  honor  of  the  event,  went  to 
the  house  of  Sumner  and  he  responded  in  a  short  speech,  from 
his  front  door,  in  which  he  urged  them  to  continue  their  efforts 
for  equal  rights  until  the  word  "  white  "  was  expunged  from 
all  our  laws  and  the  public  schools  were  open  to  all  alike. 

At  this  session  of  Congress  Sumner  introduced  a  resolution 
and  supported  it  by  a  speech,  asking  the  revocation  of  the 
charter  of  a  medical  society  of  the  District  of  Columbia  be- 


628  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

cause  it  refused  to  admit  colored  physicians  to  its  membership. 
But  he  was  unable  to  secure  action  upon  it. 

With  the  admission  of  Mississippi  came  questions  as  to  the 
right  of  each  of  her  Senators  to  a  seat.  Hiram  R.  Bevels  was 
a  colored  man,  the  first  to  ask  admission  to  the  Senate  and, 
as  if  by  a  strange  decree  of  Providence,  who  sometimes  chooses 
the  weak  things  of  earth  to  confound  the  mighty,  he  came  to 
occupy  the  seat  made  vacant  by  Jefferson  Davis,  who  had 
abandoned  it  and  became  soon  after  the  President  of  the  Con 
federacy.  Adelbert  Ames,  the  other,  was  an  officer  in  the 
United  States  Army,  in  command  of  that  State  and  its  pro 
visional  Governor,  a  native  of  Maine  and  a  graduate  of  West 
Point,  who  by  brilliant  service  had  won  his  star,  before  he  was 
twenty-six  years  of  age.  He  of  course  belonged  to  that  class 
later  known  in  the  South  as  "  carpet-baggers  ".  The  only  ob 
jection  made  against  him  was  that  of  non-residence.  He  was 
in  the  State,  claimed  it  as  his  residence  and  resigned  his  posi 
tion  in  the  army  to  take  his  seat.  Sumner  spoke  and  voted  in 
favor  of  both ;  and  both  were  seated.  The  objection  made  to  the 
seating  of  Revels  was  solely  on  account  of  color.  A  Democratic 
member  moved  to  refer  his  credentials  to  the  Judiciary  Com 
mittee.  Sumner  insisted  that  the  argument  of  this  question 
was  past,  that  it  had  been  fully  discussed,  that  nothing  more 
could  be  said  upon  it  and  it  only  remained  to  act,  that  no  man 
acted  for  himself  alone,  that  what  he  did,  whether  for  good 
or  evil,  is  felt  in  widening  circles,  according  to  the  measure 
of  his  influence,  that  what  the  Senate  did  upon  this  question, 
would  be  by  way  of  example  to  be  followed  by  other  bodies 
and  associations  throughout  the  country;  it  should  be  an  ex 
ample  against  tyranny  and  wrong  and  "  for  all  everywhere  who 
feel  the  blight  of  unjust  power  ".  The  motion  to  refer  was  de 
feated  by  a  vote  of  forty-eight  to  eight;  and  by  the  same  vote 
he  was  seated. 


CHAPTER  XXXIX 

FINANCIAL  MEASURES — ONE  CENT  POSTAGE — CHINESE  INDEM 
NITY   FUND CLAIMS    AGAINST    ENGLAND IN    HARMONY 

WITH  GRANT'S  ADMINISTRATION 

THE  time  of  Congress  during  the  years  1869  and  1870  was 
largely  occupied  with  financial  measures  growing  out  of  the 
war.  There  was  much  talk  of  damages  done  by  our  armies  in 
the  South  and  claims  were  made  on  behalf  of  persons,  alleged 
to  have  been  loyal,  whose  property  had  been  destroyed  in  this 
way.  Of  course  the  claim  of  loyalty  was  hard  to  disprove, 
though  in  many  cases  it  was  gravely  questioned.  A  sample  of 
these  claims  was  in  that  presented  by  Miss  Sue  Murphy  of 
Decatur,  Alabama.  Her  house  was  entirely  destroyed  under  an 
order  from  General  Sherman  to  make  this  place  a  military 
post.  She  claimed  she  had  been  loyal  though  residing  in  a 
Rebel  State.  The  claim  provoked  discussion  because  it  was 
one  of  a  large  class  and  if  paid  would  open  the  door  for  many 
others.  Sumner  opposed  its  payment.  He  said  it  presented 
to  him  the  single  question  whether  the  nation  was  bound  to 
indemnify  a  citizen  domiciled  in  a  hostile  state  for  property 
taken  to  build  a  fort  against  the  Rebels.  He  insisted  that  the 
authorities  upon  this  question  from  the  law  of  nations  were 
all  against  the  payment  of  such  a  claim,  that  if  this  one  were 
paid,  claimants  whose  name  would  be  legion,  must  be  paid 
also  and  hence  there  was  here  a  reason  for  caution.  On  his 
motion  the  bill  to  pay  it  was  recommitted  to  the  Committee  on 
Claims.  All  of  its  class  subsequently  failed. 

The  national  debt  was  already  very  large  and  it  was  taxing 
the  resources  of  the  Government  to  keep  the  interest  paid  and 
the  bonds  provided  for  as  they  came  due.  There  was  a  care 
ful  watch  being  kept  that  it  should  not  be  unwisely  increased. 
Sumner  was  anxious  to  have  it  so  adjusted  as  to  be  in  process 
of  extinction.  He  argued,  however,  that  the  preservation  of 
the  union  was  a  work  of  such  magnitude  and  of  such  impor 
tance  to  future  generations  that  the  burden  of  it  should  not  all 
be  imposed  upon  the  country  at  once.  He  was  in  favor  of 
issuing  new  bonds  payable  in  the  future  so  that  its  payment 
should  be  gradual.  On  the  twelfth  day  of  January,  1870,  he 

629 


630  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

introduced  a  bill  for  the  purpose  of  refunding  the  debt,  pro 
viding  for  the  issue  of  three  classes  of  bonds,  all  redeemable  in 
coin  and  exempt  from  taxation.  There  was  to  be  $500,000,000. 
of  each  class  and  the  first  was  to  be  redeemable  in  from  ten  to 
forty  years,  bearing  interest  at  five  per  cent;  the  second  re 
deemable  in  from  fifteen  to  fifty  years,  with  interest  at  four  and 
one-half  per  cent;  and  the  third  redeemable  in  twenty  to  sixty 
years,  with  interest  at  four  per  cent.  The  bill  also  provided 
for  extending  the  amount  of  the  issue  of  the  circulating  notes 
of  the  National  banks  from  $300,000,000  to  $500,000,000,  the 
additional  circulation  to  be  distributed  according  to  population 
among  the  States  and  Territories.  And  an  equal  amount  of 
greenbacks  was  to  be  withdrawn.  This  additional  circulation 
of  the  banks  was  to  be  secured  by  the  four  per  cent  bonds,  re 
deemable  in  from  twenty  to  sixty  years,  deposited  with  the 
United  States  Treasurer,  in  the  proportions  of  one  hundred 
dollars  of  bonds  for  each  eighty  dollars  of  notes  issued. 

The  object  of  the  bill  was  to  retire  bonds  bearing  a  higher 
rate  of  interest  so  as  in  part  to  relieve  the  government  of  the 
enormous  burden  of  accumulating  interest  and  at  the  same  time 
extend  the  time  of  payment  of  the  debt,  so  that  it  would  not  all 
come  due  at  once,  but  gradually  and,  if  need  be,  at  long  in 
tervals.  It  was  not  his  expectation  that  it  would  all  be  paid  by 
the  generation  that  gave  its  blood  so  freely  to  put  down  the 
Rebellion,  nor  that  it  should  be  an  irredeemable  debt  like  the 
British  consols.  He  would  adhere  to  the  definite  payment  of 
the  debt  and  avoid  the  idea  that  it  was  to  be  permanent,  but 
he  would  not  require  payment  so  soon  as  to  embarrass  our  bus 
iness  interests. 

A  further  section  provided  for  the  resumption  of  specie  pay 
ments.  When  the  premium  on  gold  fell  to,  or  within  five  per 
cent,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  was  to  give  notice  that 
greenbacks  would  be  received  in  payment  of  custom  duties  at 
par. 

Sumner  spoke  on  the  subject,  between  the  twelfth  day  of 
January  and  the  eleventh  day  of  March,  1870,  on  six  different 
occasions  and  showed  a  greater  interest  in  the  measure  than 
any  other  Senator,  save  Sherman  of  Ohio,  who  was  the  Chair 
man  of  the  Committee  on  Finance.  It  was  this  Committee  that 
had  the  bill  in  charge.  Sumner  in  his  speeches  repeatedly 
urged  the  necessity  of  economy  in  the  public  expenditures  so 
that  payments  might  be  made  on  the  national  debt  and  taxes 
likewise  be  reduced. 

He  opposed  the  continuance  of  the  income  tax  because  the 
difficulties  in  the  way  of  its  fair  assessment  are  not  of  a  char- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  631 

acter  that  can  be  overcome,  though  apparently  equal,  it  being 
in  operation  most  unequal  and  vexatious.  He  argued  that  it 
was  inquisitorial,  difficult  of  collection  and  fell  with  peculiar 
weight  upon  those  who  were  disposed  to  act  honestly.  A  good 
place  for  the  reduction  of  taxes  to  begin,  he  believed,  was  in  the 
abandonment  of  this  altogether.  It  was  only  resorted  to  as  a 
war  measure.  And  the  war,  the  occasion  and  the  pretext  of  it, 
having  ended,  it  should  be  abandoned  at  once. 

He  also  moved  to  abolish  the  tariff  on  books  printed  in  for 
eign  or  dead  languages  of  which  no  editions  were  printed  in  the 
United  States ;  and,  being  voted  down  in  this,  he  then  moved  to 
add  to  the  free  list  books  with  illustrations  relating  to  the 
sciences  and  the  arts.  But  this  also  was  voted  down.  He 
argued  that  our  foreign  population — German,  Italian,  Span 
iard,  Swede  and  Dane — when  they  came  here  to  join  their 
fortune  with  ours,  should  have  the  means  of  enjoying  those 
innocent  recreations  that  are  found  in  reading  works  of  liter 
ature,  or  instruction  which  thousands  of  them  would  be 
glad  to  have.  As  to  the  books  of  sciences  and  the  arts,  many 
of  them  were  too  costly  and  the  sale  of  them  too  limited  to  be 
reprinted  and  to  deprive  men  of  the  use  of  them,  by  a  heavy 
duty,  was  an  outrage.  It  was  often  taxing  the  tools  by  which 
they  lived.  He  was  for  free  schools  and  free  knowledge  every 
where. 

But  while  he  urged  economy  and  the  reduction  of  expenses, 
there  were  certain  measures  advocated  that  he  was  unwilling 
to  agree  to,  as  either  wise  or  politic.  A  bill  was  introduced  to 
abolish  the  franking  privilege  whereby  Senators  and  Members 
of  Congress  and  other  officials  enjoyed  the  freedom  of  the  mails 
for  letters  on  official  business,  speeches,  documents,  pamphlets 
and  seeds.  He  believed  that  this  privilege  brought  the  Govern 
ment  and  people  nearer  together,  than  any  government  and 
people  ever  were  before.  It  disseminated  knowledge  by  means 
of  these  speeches  and  documents.  When  slavery  was  in  exist 
ence,  this  privilege  had  carried  the  arguments  against  it  to  the 
people  and  when  the  war  broke  out,  it  became  the  powerful  ally 
of  the  national  cause.  He  could  not  think  it  politic  to  dispense 
with  it,  without  providing  some  substitute.  He,  therefore,  in 
troduced,  as  a  substitute,  a  bill  to  reduce  the  rate  of  postage  on 
letters  to  one  cent  and  make  a  reduction  of  the  rate  on  papers. 

He  made  an  elaborate  speech  on  the  subject.  It  had  been  a 
favorite  one  with  him.  He  had  sought  as  early  as  March 
eighth,  1852,  to  secure  a  reduction  on  ocean  postage  and  had 
supported  a  resolution  of  inquiry  into  the  subject,  by  a  brief 
speech  calling  attention  to  the  extravagant  rates  charged.  The 


632  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

rate  had  been  subsequently  reduced ;  but  he  thought  them  still 
too  high.  On  the  seventh  of  December,  1868,  he  offered  a  reso 
lution  requesting  the  President  to  open  negotiations  with  Eng 
land,  France  and  Germany  for  cheaper  ocean  postage.  He 
believed  on  a  letter  of  half  an  ounce  weight  the  domestic  postage 
should  be  one  cent  and  the  foreign  should  be  three  cents.  The 
reduction  on  foreign  letters  has  since  been  made. 

On  the  tenth  of  June,  1870,  he  spoke  at  length  on  the  sub 
ject  of  cheaper  postage.  The  speech  occupies  sixty  pages  of  his 
works  and  is  an  exhaustive  historical  review  of  the  postal  sys 
tems  of  our  own  country  and  Great  Britain.  He  believed  that 
the  reduction  of  the  rates  as  he  proposed  would  result  in  the 
increased  use  of  the  mails  to  such  an  extent  that  this  would 
compensate  for  the  loss  of  the  higher  rate,  that  where  mail 
routes  were  established  and  the  mail  had  to  be  carried  the 
increased  number  of  the  letters  carried  added  comparatively 
little  to  the  cost  of  carriage.  A  reduction  of  the  fee  for  admis 
sion  to  the  Tower  of  London  in  the  ratio  of  four  to  one  was  fol 
lowed  by  an  increase  of  visitors,  to  this  great  national  museum, 
in  the  ratio  of  more  than  eight  to  one.  Another  illustration 
that  he  gave  was  of  a  panorama  in  our  country  that  at  an  en 
trance  fee  of  twenty-five  cents  did  not  pay  expenses,  but  when 
the  fee  was  reduced  to  ten  cents  the  attendance  was  so  much  in 
creased  that  it  gave  a  profit  of  one  hundred  dollars  a  week.  The 
purpose  of  his  speech  was  to  prove  by  the  experience  of  England, 
whose  letter  postage  was  one  penny,  as  well  as  by  results  shown 
by  the  reduction  of  rates,  in  the  United  States,  that  the  in 
creased  use  of  the  mails  thus  induced  would  make  our  postal 
system  more  profitable  to  the  Government. 

But  he  reminded  them  that  if  there  was  a  possible  loss  of 
revenue  the  post-office  should  not  be  viewed  as  "  a  taxing 
machine  ",  but  as  a  beneficent  agency  and  was  to  be  used  not 
to  make  money,  but  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the  people. 

"  A  letter,"  he  said,  "  is  simply  conversation  in  writing  and, 
therefore,  by  strictness  of  logic,  the  tax  you  impose  is  a  tax  on 
conversation.  *  *  *  Once  at  Mr.  Webster's  table  I  heard  the 
question  discussed,  '  From  what  do  men  derive  most  of  what 
they  know?'  The  scholars  about  him  answered, — one  naming 
(  Our  Mothers  ',  another,  '  Schools  ',  another  '  Books  ',  another 
'Newspapers',  when  the  host,,  who  had  listened  to  each,  re 
marked,  very  gravely,  c  You  forget  Conversation,  from  which, 
in  my  judgment,  we  derive  the  largest  part  of  what  we  know.' '; 
Sumner  argued  that  conversation  being  a  great  educational 
agency  should  not  be  subject  to  a  tax,  nor  should  conversation 
in  writing,  in  other  words  the  letter;  it  should  be  as  free  as  it 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  633 

can  be  made,  consistent  with  the  actual  expense  of  carriage  and 
delivery. 

Slavery,  Sumner  insisted,  had  always  been  the  enemy  of  the 
postal  service ;  so  long  as  it  held  sway,  improvements  could  not 
be  made;  that  one  of  the  first  legislative  acts  of  the  Confed 
erate  Government  at  Montgomery  was  to  raise  the  rates  of 
postage;  that  this  department  had  received  the  care  of  anti- 
slavery  men,  before  the  war  and  now  when  they  could,  they 
should  make  it  the  best  in  the  world,  by  carrying  letters  to 
every  door  at  the  smallest  charge  consistent  with  expense.  He 
would  make  it  an  agency  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the  people 
and  increase  their  happiness,  keeping  these  objects  first  and  its 
earning  capacity  second. 

Among  the  matters  of  interest,  relating  to  the  Treasury, 
that  came  to  Sumner's  hands  at  this  session  was  a  balance  of 
the  Chinese  Indemnity  Fund.  In  1858  the  Chinese  govern 
ment  had  entered  into  a  treaty  with  ours  whereby  it  was  to  pay 
five  hundred  thousand  taels  or  about  seven  hundred  thousand 
dollars  of  our  money  to  liquidate  certain  claims  made  by  our 
citizens  for  damages  done  our  shipping  by  the  depredations  of 
Chinese  pirates,  etc.  The  claims  then  made  amounted  to  more 
than  one  million  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars,  but  it 
was  believed  they  would  be  reduced,  when  an  actual  settlement 
of  them  came  to  be  made.  They  were  in  fact  so  largely  reduced 
by  the  authorities  having  the  adjustment  in  charge,  that  about 
two  hundred  thousand  dollars  of  the  fund  remained  after  the 
awards  were  satisfied.  This  fund  had  increased  by  investment, 
but  otherwise  it  was  in  this  condition  ever  since  1860. 

The  successive  Presidents  had  called  the  attention  of  Con 
gress  to  it  and  asked  action  upon  it,  but  none  had  been  taken. 
Various  suggestions  had  been  made  as  to  the  disposition  of  the 
fund ;  one  was  to  build  an  American  college  with  it,  in  Pekin, 
China,  for  the  education  of  students  of  both  nations,  each  in 
the  language  of  the  other;  another  use  suggested  was  to  build 
an  embassy  for  the  United  States,  at  Pekin,  our  country 
having  none  there ;  still  another  was  to  return  the  money  to 
China,  although  she  was  making  no  claim  to  it.  The  matter 
was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations  on  March 
tenth,  1870,  and,  with  its  customary  promptness  under  Sum 
ner's  Chairmanship,  it  reported  on  June  twenty-fourth  follow 
ing.  The  report  was  prepared  by  Sumner. 

It  reviewed  the  origin  and  history  of  the  fund.  It  had  been 
invested  in  United  States  bonds  and,  with  its  accumulation, 
now  amounted  to  three  hundred  and  eighty-six  thousand  dol 
lars.  Sumner  insisted  that  the  fund  had  only  been  held  by  us  in 


634  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

trust,  that  in  equity  it  belonged  to  China  and  should  be  re 
turned  to  her  and  the  report  advised  that  this  disposition  be 
made  of  it.  "  Whatever  may  be  our  technical  title  ",  the  report 
tersely  said,  "  in  conscience  the  money  is  not  ours  ".  It  will  be 
noticed  how  he  brought  measures  to  this  test;  in  conscience, 
what  is  right?  By  its  return,  he  urged,  our  country  would 
perform  an  act  of  justice  to  China,  though  still  unsought  and 
relieve  itself  of  a  troublesome  trust,  which  so  long  as  it  con 
tinued,  would  be  a  bait  to  disappointed  claimants,  whose  claims 
had  been  rejected  by  the  proper  authorities  as  not  entitled  to 
payment. 

But  international  claims  of  much  greater  importance  un 
expectedly  came  into  prominence  again  about  this  time.  These 
were  our  claims  against  England  growing  out  of  her  conduct 
towards  us  during  the  war.  They  had  been  of  absorbing  in 
terest  since  the  early  days  of  the  war.  It  will  be 'remembered 
that  Sumner,  in  September,  1863,  made  an  address  on  this 
subject  at  Cooper's  Institute  in  New  York  City,  at  the  invita 
tion  of  the  Young  Men's  Republican  Club.  Our  Government 
had  steadily  protested,  during  the  war,  against  the  unfriendly 
course  of  England  and  it  was  determined  that  a  reparation  for 
her  acts  should  be  demanded  of  her,  at  the  close  of  hostil 
ities.  Our  Minister  to  Great  Britain,  Charles  Francis  Adams, 
had  presented  and  argued  the  questions  involved  to  the  English 
Government,  but  it  had  refused  to  make  any  reparation  or  to 
agree  to  a  reference  of  the  controversy  to  any  foreign  State. 
At  a  later  day  a  statement  of  the  claims  made  by  individuals 
for  losses  caused  by  the  battleship  Alabama,  built  and  armored 
in  England  and  manned  by  an  English  crew,  but  officered  by 
Rebels,  had  been  transmitted,  by  Secretary  Seward,  to  Mr. 
Adams,  and  was  presented  by  him  to  that  Government,  but 
it  still  declined  to  recognize  them.  Mr.  Adams  retired  from 
the  post  of  Minister  to  Great  Britain,  in  May,  1868,  with  the 
respect  of  both  nations,  having  faithfully  represented  his 
country  upon  this  question,  but  without  being  able  to  effect  a 
settlement  or  even  get  a  proposition  for  a  reference  of  it. 

He  was  succeeded  in  June,  1868,  by  Reverdy  Johnson,  a 
native  of  Maryland.  After  having  established  a  brilliant  repu 
tation  at  the  bar,  Johnson,  in  1845,  became  a  United  States 
Senator  from  his  native  State.  He  was  appointed  Attorney- 
General  of  the  United  States  in  1849  and  in  1863  was  again 
returned  to  the  Senate  for  a  full  term  of  six  years.  He  was 
therefore  a  member  of  the  Senate  at  the  time  of  his  appoint 
ment.  In  the  Impeachment  proceedings,  then  just  closed  he 
had  voted  for  the  President's  acquittal.  He  was  a  Democrat, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  635 

but  one  of  the  moderate  school.  At  the  time  of  the  assault 
made  by  Brooks  on  Sumner,  though  disapproving  of  Sumner's 
political  opinions,  he  had  expressed  his  sympathy  for  him 
and  had  condemned  the  assault.  He  was  easy,  affable  and 
naturally  courteous.  He  had  been  a  Member  of  the  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations  with  Suinner  for  several  years  and,  except 
on  party  questions,  they  had  uniformly  harmonized.  These 
traits  gave  him  strength  when  his  nomination  was  made.  Few 
Democrats,  especially  of  his  age,  for  he  was  then  in  his  seventy- 
third  year,  could  have  secured  the  ready  confirmation  he  did, 
on  the  eve  of  a  Presidential  election,  for  a  post  requiring  such 
talent  for  foreign  diplomacy  and  knowledge  of  international 
law.  Sumner  favored  rejecting  the  appointment,  or  any  other 
the  President  would  make,  preferring  to  leave  the  embassy  in 
charge  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Legation,  for  the  short  interval 
before  a  new  administration  would  be  inaugurated.  But  upon 
privatelv  suggesting  that  course,  he  found  his  Republican  col 
leagues  were  disposed  to  give  Johnson  the  compliment  of  the 
short  service  that  remained.  He,  therefore,  yielded  to  this 
preference  of < his  colleagues  and  Johnson  was  unanimously  con 
firmed,  Sumner  feeling  that  if  confirmed  at  all,  it  should  be  in 
such  way  that  he  would  feel  obliged  to  the  Republicans.  The 
evening  after, the  confirmation  Johnson  called  at  Sumner's 
house  and  thanked  him  for  the  unanimity  of  the  action  of  the 
Senate. 

It  was  not  expected  among  the  Senators  that  a  settlement  of 
the  Alabama  claims  would  be  undertaken  by  the  new  Minister, 
but  that  he  would  take  up  the  subjects  of  naturalization  and 
the  San  Juan  boundary  about  which  there  were  disputes  be 
tween  the  two  countries.  But  when  Johnson  reached  England 
he  promptly  entered  upon  a  negotiation  for  a  settlement  of  the 
Alabama  claims,  with  Lord  Clarendon,  the  British  Minister 
of  Foreign  Affairs.  It  was  the  evident  wish  of  both  our 
Minister  and  Secretary  of  State  to  add  the  settlement  of  this 
old  and  much-talked-of  dispute  to  the  accomplishments  of 
President  Johnson's  administration.  To  facilitate  its  progress, 
much  of  the  preliminary  work  was  carried  on  between  the 
Secretary  'and  Minister  by  cable  so  that  it  was  known  the  treaty 
was  progressing  under  the  immediate  direction  of  Mr.  Seward, 
As  his  work  in  the  Department  of  State  had  been  generally 
approved,  much  was  hoped  for  the  treaty,  if  it  should  reach 
completion.  No  one  was  prepared  for  the  disappointment  and 
chagrin  that  was  felt,  when  its  terms  became  known.  It  was 
signed  January  fourteenth,  1869,  and  reached  this  country  the 
following  month,  only  a  few  weeks  before  the  expiration  of  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

President's  term.  It  was  at  once  transmitted  to  the  Senate 
where  it  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 
It  is  known  in  history  as  the  Johnson-Clarendon  Treaty,  from 
the  names  of  the  two  Ministers  who  negotiated  it. 

There  had  been  a  feeling  of  exasperation  at  the  course  of 
England  towards  the  North.  Her  indecent  haste  in  according 
belligerent  rights  to  the  South  in  little  more  than  one  month 
after  the  bombardment  of  Fort  Sumter,  the  building  of  the 
pirate  ships  in  her  dockyards  and  permitting  them  to  escape, 
manned  with  British  seamen,  to  prey  upon  our  merchant 
marine  after  our  Minister  had  pointed  out  their  character,  the 
sale  of  guns  and  other  munitions  of  war  by  her  people  to  the 
Rebels,  their  subscription  to  the  loans  negotiated  by  the  Con 
federate  Government  to  raise  money  to  maintain  the  Rebellion, 
were  all  too  well  known  to  be  soon  forgotten.  It  was  remem 
bered,  too,  that  some  of  the  subscribers  to  the  Confederate  Loan 
stood  high  among  British  statesmen,  Lord  Robert  Cecil,  since 
Marquis  of  Salisbury  and  Premier  of  England,  more  than 
twenty  of  her  Members  of  Parliament,  and  twice  as  many  of  her 
nobility.  Many  of  these  same  men  had  established  and  become 
officers  of  an  association  to  promote  the  cause  of  the  Rebellion 
and  supply  it  with  funds.  Harsh  comments  came  from  leading 
British  statesmen  upon  the  course  of  the  North,  with  threats  of 
intervention.  The  builder  of  the  Alabama  was  cheered  in  Par 
liament,  when  he  declared  that  the  institutions  of  the  United 
States  were  of  no  value  whatever  and  had  "  reduced  the  name 
of  Liberty  to  an  utter  absurdity."  Another  Member,  Roebuck, 
argued  that  it  was  not  to  England's  interest  to  see  the  North 
triumph  and  declared :  "  As  far  as  my  influence  goes  I  am 
determined  to  do  all  I  can  to  prevent  the  reconstruction  of  the 
Union."  These  were  not  accidental  expressions,  but  common 
in  that  body,  where  more  than  half  the  Members  were  open, 
sympathizers  with  the  South.  Hardly  less  exasperating  was 
England's  tone  of  guardianship  over  the  North  as  if  she  were 
the  parent,  responsible  to  the  world  for  the  acts  of  her  child, 
to  watch  every  movement,  forbid  what  she  disapproved  and  in 
terfere  to  punish,  if  disobeyed. 

The  extent  of  the  injury  was  well  known  to  the  people  of  the 
North.  There  was  no  country  where  the  masses  understood  so 
well  questions  of  national  interest.  The  common  schools 
trained  the  youth,  newspapers  were  cheap  and  everywhere  read, 
the  constantly  recurring  popular  elections,  at  which  all  men 
voted,  with  the  thorough  discussion  of  the  issues  at  stake,  the 
habit  of  independent  thought,  which  a  century  of  self -govern- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER  637 

ment  had  cultivated,  all  united  to  develop  public  interest  in 
such  a  controversy.  Its  merits  were  well  understood  by  the 
people,  who  had  lately  had  many  lessons  of  love  o±  country 
and  devotion  to  the  flag,  and  their  sense  of  injury,  when  now 
in  the  flush  of  victory  and  with  hands  again  free,  was  deep- 
seated  and  their  resentment  not  easily  concealed.  There  was 
a  general  expression  of  disappointment  from  them  when  the 
terms  of  this  treaty  became  known. 

When  it  came  to  be  considered  in  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations  every  member  was  found  to  be  against  it.  The  report 
was  not  made  for  some  weeks,  but  when  presented  it  unani- 
mouslv  recommended  that  the  Senate  reject  the  treaty.  It 
became  Sumner's  duty,  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  present 
ing  the  report,  to  give  the  reasons  which  actuated  them  in 
making  this  recommendation.  This  he  did,  in  a  speech  of  an 
hour's  length,  on  the  thirteenth  day  of  April,  1869.  It  was  a 
careful  review  of  the  grounds  of  complaint  against  the  treaty 
and  of  our  claims  on  England.  It  was  almost  judicial  in  its 
tone,  avoiding  anything  that  would  seem  to  savor  of  bitterness 
and  aiming  to  present  the  facts  in  their  true  light.  While 
realizing  the  great  wrong  that  had  been  done  by  England,  he 
still  felt  his  early  love  for  the  people  and  country  that  had  con 
tributed  much  to  his  own  happiness.  He  wished  an  honor 
able  settlement  of  our  claims,  but  he  would  have  been  among 
the  last  to  resort  to  war  to  secure  it.  He  did  not  believe  there 
would  be  any  occasion  for  such  a  resort,  but  felt  that  if  our 
wrongs  were  clearly  understood,  the  well-known  sense  of  justice 
of  the  English  people  would  prevail  to  right  them.  He,  there 
fore,  hoped  by  what  he  said  to  so  reach  the  English  people  as  to 
convince  them  of  the  rightfulness  of  our  case,  promote  an 
adequate  settlement,  and  thus  remove  all  cause  for  bitterness 
and  lead  to  a  lasting  peace. 

He  said  this  was  the  first  instance,  since  he  came  into  the 
Senate,  of  a  report  recommending  the  summary  rejection  of  a 
treaty.  They  had  sometimes  amended,  sometimes  reported 
without  any  recommendation,  but  never,  so  far  as  he  could 
remember,  had  they  asked  a  rejection.  But  the  exceptional 
character  of  this  treaty  seemed  to  justify  this  report.  He  be 
lieved,  in  the  interest  of  peace,  which  all  should  desire,  that 
it  should  be  so  treated. 

He  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  national  claims  were 
ignored  entirely  in  it,  no  direct  mention  being  made  of  the 
injury  the  Nation  had  suffered.  This,  he  said,  was  a  strange 
omission  when  it  was  remembered  that  the  acts  of  England  had 
given  early  encouragement  and  constant  material  support  to 


638  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  Rebellion,  nerving  the  South  to  strike  the  blow  and  cheering 
her  to  continue  the  battle  with  the  constant  hope  of  interven 
tion  ;  and  yet  the  terms  agreed  upon  were  wide  enough  to  for 
ever  bar  a  future  recovery  for  the  enormous  expense  caused  by 
the  prolongation  of  the  war.  There  was  not  even  a  word  of 
acknowledgment  or  of  apology  for  this  persistent  course  of 
wrongdoing.  The  whole  case  was  here  treated  as  one  for 
private  injuries  to  our  citizens,  as  if  claims  of  individuals  were 
the  only  matters  of  damage  in  issue. 

The  preamble  of  the  treaty  commenced  with  a  recital  that 
claims  had  been  made  by  citizens  of  the  United  States  on  Great 
Britain  and  by  subjects  of  Great  Britain  on  the  United  States 
and  some  of  such  claims  were  still  pending  and  unsettled,  and 
the  rulers  of  the  two  nations,  believing  that  a  settlement  of  them 
would  contribute  to  the  maintenance  of  friendly  feelings,  had 
sought  to  make  this  arrangement  for  such  a  settlement.  Sum- 
ner  suggested  that  there  was  nothing  in  this  to  give  notice  of 
the  real  question  that  had  so  deeply  stirred  the  American  people 
— the  wrongs  to  our  Nation.  This  only  recited  the  wrongs  of 
individuals.  The  body  of  the  treaty  provided  for  the  trial  of 
claims  of  individuals,  by  a  commission  to  be  created  for  that 
purpose.  The  treaty  further  provided  that  the  result  thus 
reached  was  to  be  "  a  full  and  final  settlement  of  every  claim 
upon  either  government  arising  out  of  any  transaction  of  a  date 
prior  to  the  exchange  of  ratifications  ".  So  that,  as  Sumner 
said,  there  was  no  provision  for  the  settlement  of  the  claim  for 
national  damages  and  yet  this  serious  matter  in  dispute  was  to 
be  barred  and  forever  disposed  of  by  what  was  done  as  to 
individual  claims.  It  was  even  insisted  that  among  the  in 
dividual  claims  to  be  presented  by  the  subjects  of  Great  Britain 
would  be  those  of  the  holders  of  Confederate  bonds  in  England. 

Sumner  then  passing  from  the  treaty  itself  stated  the  claim 
of  the  United  States.  He  insisted  that  the  recognition  of 
Rebels  as  belligerents,  on  land  and  on  sea,  was  hasty  and  unfair, 
that  belligerency  must  have  an  actual  existence  before,  under 
the  Law  of  Nations,  it  could  be  recognized  and  that  the  Rebels 
were  not  belligerents  on  the  ocean  at  that  time  and  never  were 
afterwards,  that  .they  must  have  had  power  on  the  ocean,  ships, 
a  navy,  and  be  prosecuting  the  war  there  and  have  prize  courts 
for  the  adjudication  of  captures  made  on  the  high  seas,  before 
the  right  of  ocean  belligerency  could  be  granted,  that  having 
none  of  these  things,  the  grant  was  wrongful;  that  it  was 
fraught  with  destructive  consequences  to  the  North,  that  with 
out  it  no  Rebel  ship  could  have  been  built  in  England,  because 
to  do  so  would  have  been  piracy,  that  to  furnish  munitions  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  639 

war,  without  it,  would  have  been  piracy,  that  to  practise 
blockade  running,  without  it,  would  have  been  piracy ;  that  the 
consequence  of  this  act  was  to  put  the  Eebels  on  an  equality 
with  us  in  the  English  markets;  that  pursuing  this  privilege, 
came  the  building  of  the  Alabama  at  Liverpool,  that  as  early  as 
July,  1862,  our  Minister  in  London,  Mr.  Adams,  had  com 
pleted  the  evidence  of  the  purpose  for  which  she  was  built  and 
accompanying  it  with  the  legal  opinion  of  an  eminent  English 
barrister  declaring  it  to  be  their  plain  duty  to  stop  her  de 
parture,  it  was  forwarded  to  the  proper  officers  and  a  remon 
strance  presented  against  permitting  her  to  leave  England,  that 
five  days  later  she  was  permitted  to  depart  on  her  piratical 
mission;  that  other  ships  were  built,  for  the  same  mission, 
among  them  ironclad  rams,  manned  and  armored  in  England, 
British  in  every  respect  except  in  their  Commanders,  who  were 
Rebels,  cheered  by  a  British  passenger  ship  upon  the  ocean, 
their  builder  cheered  in  Parliament,  where  he  defended  what  he 
had  done,  permitted  the  freedom  of  British  ports  to  obtain 
supplies,  the  Commander  of  one  of  them  saved  by  a  British 
yacht  as  his  ship  was  sinking,  after  her  destructive  course  was 
run,  as  if  symbolizing  the  omnipresent  support  of  England; 
that  everywhere  the  course  of  these  vessels  was  strewn  with  the 
wrecks  of  our  commerce,  entailing  the  loss  of  millions  to  our 
citizens  and  prolonging  the  war  and  requiring  immense  ex 
penditures  by  our  Government  to  destroy  them;  that  the 
grant  of  these  belligerent  rights  was  aggravated  by  two  cir 
cumstances,  first,  that  it  was  published  on  the  very  day  our 
Minister  arrived  in  England,  after  he  had  been  announced  and 
was  daily  expected,  but  without  giving  him  a  hearing,  second, 
that  it  was  an  unnatural  departure  from  the  avowed  anti- 
slavery  creed  of  England,  wherein  she  had  announced  her 
pledge  to  the  Universal  Abolition  of  Slavery,  whereas  she  here 
took  Rebel  slave-holders  by  the  hand,  gave  them  official  protec 
tion  and  the  God-speed  of  England,  in  their  work  of  founding  a 
slave  oligarchy. 

In  discussing  the  extent  of  our  losses  Sumner  said  those  of 
individuals  were  determinable  with  reasonable  accuracy,  that 
ships  burned  and  sunk  with  their  cargoes  could  be  estimated 
and  the  amount  fixed,  but  the  damages  done  by  commerce  being 
driven  from  the  ocean  and  the  injury  caused  by  the  prolonga 
tion  of  the  war,  which  were  our  national  losses  were  difficult  to 
fix  and  immeasurable  in  extent,  that  Mr.  Cobden  had  estimated 
the  losses  from  the  capture  and  burning  of  American  mer 
cantile  vessels  at  fifteen  million  dollars,  but  that  this  was  a 
small  part  of  it,  that  the  rest  of  our  vast  mercantile  shipping 


640  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

had  been  rendered  for  the  time  valueless,  that  during  the 
decade  from  1852  to  1862,  the  aggregate  tonnage  of  American 
vessels  entered  at  United  States  seaports  was  thirty  million 
tons  and  the  aggregate  tonnage  of  foreign  vessels  was  fourteen 
million  tons,  that  in  the  five  years  from  1863  to  1868  the 
American  tonnage  entered  was  nine  millions  and  the  foreign 
fourteen  millions,  showing  a  reduction  from  two  hundred  and 
five  to  sixty-six  per  cent;  that  this  loss  must  be  largely  attri 
buted  to  British  pirates  and  that  to  it  must  be  added  the  further 
loss  of  our  natural  increase  of  tonnage;  that  there  was  more 
over  the  loss  caused  by  the  prolongation  of  the  war,  that  no 
candid  person  could  deny  that  Rebellion  was  strengthened  and 
prolonged  by  this  aid,  that  it  was  encouraged  by  the  conces 
sion  of  belligerent  rights  on  the  ocean,  fed  by  British  supplies 
and  flamed  up  anew  with  every  burning  vessel  destroyed  by 
war  ships,  whose  base  of  supplies  was  not  in  America,  but  in 
England,  so  that  Mr.  Cobden  had  been  able  to  say  that  Eng 
land,  from  her  shores,  had  made  war  on  the  United  States  and 
done  her  an  amount  of  damage  greater  than  would  be  pro 
duced  by  many  ordinary  wars. 

In  conclusion,  he  said,  that  in  this  speech  he  was  no  volun 
teer,  that  for  several  years  he  had  avoided  saying  anything  on 
the  question,  hoping  it  would  be  settled;  but  the  submission 
of  this  treaty  made  it  his  duty  to  review  it  carefully  in  the 
Committee  and  in  making  their  report  to  state  the  reasons 
for  their  action  to  the  Senate  with  the  hope  of  aiding  to  a 
settlement  that  would  remove  all  possibility  of  strife  between 
the  two  countries. 

"  In  this  spirit/'  he  added,  "  I  have  spoken  to-day.  If  the 
case  against  England  is  strong,  and  if  our  claims  are  unprece 
dented  in  magnitude,  it  is  only  because  of  the  conduct  of  this 
power  at  a  trying  period  was  most  unfriendly,  and  the  injurious 
consequences  of  this  conduct  were  on  a  scale  corresponding  to 
the  theatre  of  action.  Life  and  property  were  both  swallowed 
up,  leaving  behind  a  deep-seated  sense  of  enormous  wrong,  as 
yet  unatoned  and  even  unacknowledged,  which  is  one  of  the 
chief  factors,  in  the  problem  now  presented  to  the  statesmen  of 
both  countries.  The  attempt  to  close  this  great  international 
debate  without  a  complete  settlement  is  little  short  of  puerile/' 
*  *  *  « rpkg  truth  must  be  told, — not  in  anger  but  in  sad 
ness.  England  has  done  the  United  States  an  injury  most 
difficult  to  measure.  Considering  when  it  was  done  and  in  what 
complicity,  it  is  truly  unaccountable.  At  a  great  epoch  of  his 
tory,  not  less  momentous  than  that  of  the  French  Revolution 
or  that  of  the  Reformation,  when  Civilization  was  fighting  a 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  641 

last  battle  with  Slavery,  England  gave  her  name,  her  influence, 
her  material  resources  to  the  wicked  cause,  and  flung  a  sword 
into  the  scale  with  slavery.  Here  was  a  portentous  mistake. 
*  *  *  And  yet  down  to  this  day  there  is  no  acknowledgment 
of  this  wrong — not  a  single  word.  Such  a  generous  expres 
sion  would  be  the  beginning  of  a  just  settlement,  and  the  best 
assurance  of  that  harmony  between  two  great  and  kindred 
nations  which  all  must  desire." 

At  the  close  of  the  speech,  the  Senate  rejected  the  treaty,  by  a 
vote  of  fifty -four  to  one. 

The  speech  was  received  with  general  commendation.  The 
Senate  approved  it  and  before  opening  its  doors  and,  without 
suggestion  from  Sumner  removed  the  ban  of  secrecy,  which  the 
executive  session  had  enjoined;  and  the  speech  appeared  in 
many  of  the  leading  dailies  of  the  country.  A  pamphlet  edition 
of  it  was  printed  for  circulation  in  England.  The  President 
and  Secretary  of  State  both  commended  it.  Efforts  were  made, 
in  the  subsequent  controversy  between  Sumner  and  the  Pres 
ident,  over  San  Domingo,  to  show  that  the  President  and  his 
Secretary  disapproved  of  certain  parts  of  it,  but  the  contem 
porary  evidence  to  the  contrary  is  conclusive.  It  was  recog 
nized  by  them  as  well  as  by  the  masses  of  Americans  as  a  plain, 
direct  and  forcible  statement  of  the  American  position.  Its 
conservative  tone  was  noted  and  it  was  characterized,  at  the 
time,  as  the  most  popular  speech  Sumner  had  ever  delivered. 

In  England  the  reception  of  it  was  different.  It  was  there 
hoped  that  the  troublesome  controversy  was  in  course  of  final 
and  satisfactory  settlement,  upon  terms  altogether  easy  to  her. 
When  the  treaty  was  so  summarily  rejected  and,  accompanying 
the  rejection,  came  the  speech  of  Sumner  there  was  bitterness 
generally  expressed  and  much  of  it  was  directed  to  Sunnier. 
His  position  was  a  disappointment  to  his  English  friends, 
who  hoped  he  would  use  his  influence  to  close  the  apparently 
widening  breach.  In  the  long  years  of  their  friendship  they 
had  been  in  accord  with  so  much  of  his  work  that  they 
were  greatly  disappointed  at  his  position  and,  as  one  of  them 
expressed  it,  when  his  name  was  mentioned  they  were  silent 
for  the  first  time  now.  The  daily  newspapers  in  Great  Britain, 
which  had  much  to  do  in  molding  public  sentiment,  more  than 
in  America,  did  not  publish  his  speech,  but  resorted  to  extrav 
agant  statements  of  its  contents,  calculated  to  create  preju 
dice  against  him.  He  was  held  responsible  for  the  action  of  the 
Senate,  though  the  feeling  against  the  treaty  was  so  general 
and  so  pronounced  that  it  would  have  been  defeated,  without  a 
word  from  him.  But  after  all,  the  effect  of  the  speech  upon 


(342  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMMER 

England  was  good.  It  contributed  to  awaken  there  a  better  ap 
preciation  of  the  merits  of  the  controversy.  One  of  her  con 
trolling  public  men  wrote  Sumner  in  acknowledging  a  copy 
of  the  speech :  "  I  cannot  tell  you  how  cordially  I  sympathize 
with  what  seems  to  me  the  governing  idea  of  the  speech.  Great 
international  differences  are  not  to  be  disposed  of  by  huddling 
them  up  and  pretending  not  to  look  at  them,  nor  to  be  treated, 
as  a  man  treats  a  bad  shilling,  by  trying  to  pass  it  among  a 
handful  of  half-pence."  This  would  have  been  good  advice  to 
give  Johnson  and  Clarendon  at  the  beginning  of  their  labors 
on  the  treaty. 

Sumner's  purpose  was  not  to  secure  large  damages  from 
England  and  certainly  not  to  provoke  hostilities  between  the 
two  countries — nothing  could  have  been  farther  from  him.  He 
had  been  for  many  years  the  firm  advocate  of  peace.  But  he 
did  wish  England  to  realize  the  great  wrong  she  had  done  us, 
and  acknowledge  it  and  establish  a  principle  of  international 
law,  that  would  be  a  guide  to  civilized  nations  for  the  future 
and  prevent  the  recurrence  of  such  wrongs  and  the  occasion 
for  hostile  feeling  and  perhaps  war. 

President  Grant  was  in  entire  accord  with  the  action  of  the 
Senate  upon  the  treaty  and  so  expressed  himself  in  his  next 
annual  message  to  Congress.  He  there  reiterated  the  claim 
Sumner  had  made  for  national  damages,  enumerated  the 
same  items  of  injury,  and  regretted  that  the  Johnson-Clarendon 
treaty  had  assumed  that  the  subject  was  one  for  individual 
losses  alone. 

"  The  injuries  resulting,"  he  said,  "  to  the  United  States  by 
reason  of  the  course  adopted  by  Great  Britain  during  our  late 
civil  war  in  the  increased  rates  of  insurance ;  in  the  diminution 
of  exports  and  imports,  and  other  obstructions  to  domestic  in 
dustry  and  production ;  in  its  effect  upon  the  foreign  commerce 
of  the  country;  in  the  decrease  and  transfer  to  Great  Britain 
of  our  commercial  marine ;  in  the  prolongation  of  the  war  and 
the  increased  cost  both  in  treasure  and  in  lives,  of  its  suppres 
sion,  could  not  be  adjusted  and  satisfied  as  ordinary  com 
mercial  claims,  which  continually  arise  between  commercial 
nations  *  *  *  Not  a  word  was  found  in  the  treaty  and  not 
an  inference  could  be  drawn  from  it,  to  remove  the  sense  of  the 
unfriendliness  of  the  course  of  Great  Britain,  in  our  struggle 
for  existence,  which  so  deeply  and  universally  impressed  itself 
upon  the  people  of  this  country.  *  *  *  I  regarded  the  action 
of  the  Senate  in  rejecting  the  treaty  to  have  been  wisely  taken 
in  the  interest  of  peace  and  as  a  necessary  step  in  the  direction 
of  a  perfect  and  cordial  friendship  between  the  two  countries." 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  643 

Mr.  Motley,  our  Minister,  who  had  in  the  meantime  succeeded 
Mr.  Johnson,  announced  the  rejection  of  the  treaty  to  the 
English  Government.  The  United  States  was,  under  instruc 
tions  from  the  Secretary  of  State,  committed  then  to  the  claim 
for  national  damages,  in  addition  to  the  claim  for  individual 
losses.  But  as  the  feeling  aroused  in  England  by  the  rejection 
of  the  treaty  and  Sumner's  speech  setting  out  our  wider  claim 
for  damages  rendered  the  chance  of  a  present  settlement  un 
favorable,  our  Minister  was  instructed  not  to  press  the  matter 
then.  In  these  steps  Sumner  was  constantly  consulted  by  Secre 
tary  Fish,  who  had  succeeded  Mr.  Seward  while  the  treaty  was 
still  in  the  hands  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Kelations. 
During  the  summer,  the  Secretary  asked  Sumner  to  prepare  a 
statement  of  our  case  to  be  presented  to  the  English  Govern 
ment,  but  Sumner  declined  and  suggested  General  Gushing, 
who  did  prepare  the  able  presentation  of  it  known  as  the  dis 
patch  to  Motley  of  September  twenty-fifth,  18 G9,  and  embody 
ing  Sumner's  views. 

A  year  went  by  and  nothing  further  was  done.  In  his  an 
nual  message  to  Congress  in  December,  1870,  President  Grant 
spoke  of  the  unwillingness  of  England  to  admit  that  she  had 
been  guilty  of  negligence  towards  the  United  States  or  did  or 
permitted  any  act  of  which  they  had  any  cause  of  complaint 
and  suggested  that  Congress  make  provision  for  the  proof  and 
payment  of  private  claims  of  our  citizens,  after  notice  to  the 
English  Government,  so  that  our  Government  could  thus  be 
come  the  owner  of  these  claims.  It  thus  became  apparent  to 
England  that  there  would  be  no  abandonment  of  our  claim 
and  no  disposition  to  be  hurried  in  the  settlement  of  it,  by  the 
urgency  of  private  claimants.  This  quickly  awakened  Eng 
land's  interest  in  the  subject  especially  in  view  of  the  possibility 
of  her  being  involved  in  the  war  then  waging  between  Germany 
and  France,  when  piratical  Alabamas  and  ironclads  might  es 
cape  from  American  ports  to  prey  on  English  shipping,  or  our 
well-equipped  gun  factories  might  make  sales  of  arms  to  her 
enemies. 

Early  in  January,  1871,  Sir  John  Eose,  a  London  banker, 
was  dispatched  as  a  confidential  agent  of  the  English  Govern 
ment  to  learn  the  feeling  in  our  country  on  the  subject  of  a 
settlement.  Following  this  up,  in  the  same  month,  a  corre 
spondence  was  commenced  by  England  looking  to  a  settlement 
of  all  matters  in  dispute  between  the  two  countries.  The  ques 
tion  which  for  six  years  had  been  permitted  to  lie  idle,  almost 
ignored  by  Great  Britain,  had  in  a  day  become  urgent.  A  Joint 
High  Commission,  the  members  to  be  named  by  each  Govern- 


644  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ment,  was  created,  to  meet  in  Washington  and  discuss  the 
subject.  The  course  of  events  was  so  rapid  that  in  twenty- 
seven  days  from  the  time  of  its  suggestion  the  Members  of  the 
Commission  were  in  New  York.  They  did  not  wait  to  receive 
their  commissions,,  which  were  sent  after  them  by  a  special 
messenger,  and  it  was  laughingly  said,  they  did  not  delay  their 
departure  from  England  long  enough  to  pack  their  trunks,  but 
left  that  to  be  done  by  their  servants  who  were  to  follow 
them. 

Sumner,  though  not  then  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Relations,  was  in  frequent  consultation  with  both  the 
American  and  English  Commissioners.  Two  of  the  English 
Commissioners,  Earl  De  Grey  and  Sir  Stafford  Northcote 
brought  letters  of  introduction  to  him  and  Sir  Edward  Thorn 
ton,  the  British  Minister,  invited  Sumner  to  dine  with  the  Eng 
lish  members,  no  other  guest  being  present.  He  repeatedly  en 
tertained  them.  Both  sides  recognized  his  familiarity  with  the 
subject  and  his  influence  in  the  Senate  and  with  the  people. 

A  treaty  was  concluded  by  them  in  Washington  on  May 
eighth,  1871.  England  expressed,  in  a  friendly  spirit,  her 
regret  for  the  escape  of  the  Alabama  and  other  vessels  from 
British  ports  and  for  the  depredations  committed  by  these 
vessels.  She  agreed  that  all  the  claims  growing  out  of  acts 
committed  by  these  vessels  and  generally  known  as  the  Ala- 
lama  claims  should  be  referred  to  a  tribunal  of  arbitration, 
to  be  composed  of  five  arbitrators,  one  to  be  named  by  President 
Grant,  one  by  Queen  Victoria,  one  by  the  King  of  Italy,  one 
by  the  President  of  the  Swiss  Confederation  and  one  by  the 
Emperor  of  Brazil.  The  terms  of  the  Johnson-Clarendon 
treaty  were  thus  far  exceeded  and  the  national  claims  insisted 
upon  by  Sumner,  became  a  subject  of  settlement.  England 
acknowledged  her  error  in  permitting  the  escape  of  these  ves 
sels.  But  a  still  greater  concession  was  made  and  one  much  de 
sired  by  Sumner.  England  agreed  that,  in  deciding  the  matters 
submitted,  the  arbitrators  should  be  governed  by  three  rules  to 
be  taken  as  applicable  to  the  case;  first,  a  neutral  Government 
is  bound  to  use  due  diligence  to  prevent  the  fitting  out,  arming 
or  equipping  within  its  jurisdiction  of  any  vessel  which  it  has 
reasonable  ground  to  believe  is  intended  to  cruise  or  carry  on 
war  against  a  power  with  which  it  is  at  peace  and  to  prevent 
the  departure  from  its  jurisdiction  of  such  vessel  there  adapted 
in  whole  or  in  part  to  warlike  use;  second,  such  Government  is 
not  to  suffer  either  belligerent  to  use  its  forts  or  waters  for  a 
base  of  operations,  supplies  or  recruitment  of  men ;  third,  such 
Government  must  use  due  diligence  in  its  forts  and  waters  and 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  645 

over  all  persons  therein  to  prevent  a  violation  of  the  foregoing 
obligation. 

Sumner's  criticisms  of  the  Johnson-Clarendon  treaty  were 
thus  observed  in  the  making  of  this  one,  afterwards  known  as 
the  Treaty  of  Washington  from  the  place  where  it  was  nego 
tiated.  The  English  Commissioners  confessed  their  obliga 
tions  to  this  speech  of  Sumner.  One  of  them  said  that  they 
had  used  it  "  as  a  chart  "  and  that  his  suggestions  had  been  sub 
stantially  adopted.  Sumner  himself  said  the  new  treaty  met 
every  point  he  had  made  against  the  Johnson  Convention,  ex 
cept  the  amount  of  the  damages  which  was  of  course  to  be  de 
termined  from  the  evidence.  Judge  Hoar,  who  was  one  of  the 
American  Commissioners,  and  who  had  been  in  frequent  con 
sultation  with  him  as  their  work  progressed,  carried  the  first 
available  copy  of  it  to  Sumner  inclosed  in  an  envelope,  indorsed, 
"  The  result  of  long  and  earnest  labor  is  presented  and  ded 
icated  with  respect  and  confidence  by  his  friend,  E.  R.  Hoar." 
Sumner  spoke  and  voted  for  the  ratification  of  the  treaty.  He 
suggested  some  amendments,  in  the  way  of  principles  of  inter 
national  law  to  guide  in  future  wars,  but  did  not  press  them. 

The  Court  of  Arbitration  met  at  Geneva,  Switzerland,  in 
December,  1871,  and  after  a  hearing  of  nine  months  awarded 
fifteen  million,  five  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  be  paid  in 
gold  by  England  to  the  United  States,  in  satisfaction  of  all 
claims. 

After  the  break  came  between  Sumner  and  President  Grant 
over  San  Domingo,  there  was  an  effort  made  by  some  of  the 
President's  friends  to  make  it  appear  that  there  were  differences 
between  them  over  the  Alabama  claims.  It  was  said  that  the 
President  felt  Sumner's  views  on  the  grant  of  belligerent  rights 
to  the  Rebels  and  the  American  claim  for  national  damages 
were  extreme  and  that  he  might  involve  us  in  war  with  Eng 
land  over  them  and  hence  desired  his  removal  from  the  Chair 
manship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  to  promote 
a  peaceful  settlement  with  Great  Britain. 

From  what  has  already  been  said  it  will  appear  that  there  was 
no  foundation  whatever  for  such  a  claim.  It  was  only  an 
effort  by  the  apologists  of  the  President  to  conceal  the  real 
cause  of  the  difference.  Some  months  after  the  delivery  of 
Sumner's  speech  and  after  the  President  had  congratulated 
him  upon  it  and  repeatedly  expressed  his  approval  of  its  posi 
tions  both  on  belligerency  and  national  claims,  Grant  favored 
the  extension  of  belligerent  rights  to  the  insurgents  in  Cuba, 
in  one  of  their  revolutions  against  Spain.  Rawlins,  Secretary 
of  War,  was  very  urgent  with  the  President  to  have  him  recog- 


646  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

nize  Cuban  belligerency.  On  the  fifteenth  of  December,  1869, 
Siimner  spoke  against  it  in  the  Senate  and  he  was  urgent  with 
Fish  and  others  near  the  President  to  prevent  the  step.  The 
revolutionists  had  no  city,  no  government.,  no  courts,  no  ships 
and  hence  had  no  title  to  be  treated  as  belligerents.  The  in 
fluence  of  Stunner  and  his  friends  finally  prevailed  to  prevent 
it  and  among  the  arguments  used  was  that  it  would  weaken  our 
case  against  England.  But  the  President  was  on  this  account, 
during  the  fall  of  1869,  disposed  to  give  less  prominence  to  the 
action  of  England  in  granting  the  South  belligerent  rights, 
than  he  had  been  at  the  time  and  for  some  months  after  the 
delivery  of  Sumner's  speech.  Hence  there  was  seeming  ground 
for  the  claim  made  by  the  President's  friends  of  a  disagreement. 

The  other  point  of  difference  claimed  was  that  the  President 
did  not  agree  to  the  claim  made  by  Sumner  for  national  dam 
ages.  But  we  have  seen  how  the  President  in  his  annual  Mes 
sage  to  Congress  in  December,  1869,  set  out  these  very  claims 
himself;  and  he  insisted  on  them  repeatedly  afterwards.  They 
were  included  in  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  which  was  ratified 
by  the  Senate  and  were  presented,  in  the  statement  of  the  case 
prepared  by  the  United  States  government,  with  such  fullness, 
that  they  threatened  at  the  time  to  break  up  the  court  of 
Arbitration  at  Geneva,  by  the  withdrawal  of  England.  This 
statement  Sumner  had  no  hand  in  preparing  and  disapproved 
as  harsh.  It  was  prepared  by  the  Assistant  Secretary  of  State, 
J.  C.  Bancroft  Davis,  under  the  direction  of  Secretary  Fish  and 
was  approved  by  President  Grant.  A  modification  of  this 
claim  was  sought  and  obtained  by  the  English  government  and 
the  arbitration  proceeded  and  hence  the  pretext  for  the  state 
ment  that  Sumner  was  extravagant.  Curiously  enough  the  man 
who  has  made  the  claim  of  Sumner's  extravagance  as  the  oc 
casion  of  the  break  with  Grant,  was  J.  C.  Bancroft  Davis  who 
himself  prepared  this  statement  of  the  American  case. 

But  these  things,  if  true,  would  not  furnish  a  justification  for 
the  removal  of  Sumner  from  his  place  at  the  head  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  which  he  had  filled  so  long  and 
with  such  honor  to  his  country.  And  if  there  was  no  founda 
tion  for  them  in  fact,  they  should  not  have  been  made  to  cover 
up  the  real  and  unworthy  cause  of  the  removal. 

Sumner  was  in  entire  harmony  with  the  Republican  Admin 
istration  at  the  close  of  the  year  1869.  He  was  chosen  in 
September  to  preside  over  the  Republican  State  convention  of 
Massachusetts,  meeting  at  Worcester  and  upon  taking  the 
chair,  reviewed  the  Issues  upon  National  Affairs  at  Home  and 
Abroad.  In  the  whole  speech  there  was  no  note  of  disagree- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  647 

ment.  He  spoke  of  the  misrule  of  Andrew  Johnson,  encourag 
ing  the  South  to  acts  of  lawlessness  and  the  difficulties  Recon 
struction  had  encountered  under  him  and  said :  "  Andrew 
Johnson  is  now  out  of  the  way,  and  in  his  place  a  patriot  Presi 
dent.  Public  opinion  must  come  to  his  support  in  this  neces 
sary  work.  There  is  but  one  thing  these  disturbers  feel ;  it  is 
power;  and  this  they  must  be  made  to  feel:  I  mean  the  power 
of  an  awakened  people,  directed  by  a  Republican  Administra 
tion,  vigorously,  constantly,  surely,  so  there  shall  be  no  rest 
for  the  wicked."  He  warned  against  repudiation  in  any  form, 
and  counselled  against  the  grant  of  belligerent  rights  to  Cuba ; 
and  passing  to  the  Alabama  claims  he  reviewed  our  case  briefly, 
but  temperately.  Speaking  of  our  damages  he  said :  "  Call 
them  what  you  please,  to  this  extent  the  nation  lost.  The 
records  show  how  our  commerce  suffered,  and  witnesses  with 
out  number  testify  how  the  blockade  was  broken  and  the  war 
prolonged.  Ask  any  of  our  great  generals, — ask  Sherman, 
Sheridan,  Thomas,  Meade,  Burnside, — ask  Grant."  Grant  was 

E resent  in  his  thoughts  and  he  was  in  full  co-operation  with 
im  in  the  work  of  a  Republican  Administration. 


CHAPTER   XL 

CONTINUED  INTEREST   IN   REPUBLICAN   PARTY — SCHEME   TO  AN 
NEX  SAN  DOMINGO SICKNESS — REMOVAL  FROM  COMMITTEE 

ON  FOREIGN  RELATIONS FAILURE  OF  ANNEXATION 

ON  the  fifteenth  day  of  October,  1870,  Sumner  presided  at  a 
Republican  ratification  meeting  held  in  Faneuil  Hall.  Gover 
nor  Claflin  and  Congressmen  Hooper  and  Twichell  were  candi 
dates  for  re-election  and  the  Legislature  to  be  elected  would 
choose  the  successor  to  his  colleague  Senator  Wilson,  who  was 
also  a  candidate  for  re-election.  These  men  were  all  close 
friends  of  Sumner  and  he  desired  to  see  them  all  re-elected. 
He  mentioned  all  in  his  speech  on  taking  the  chair  and  urged 
their  re-election. 

As  showing  his  still  continued  harmony  with  his  party,  he 
said :  "  I  would  add  one  further  word  in  reply  to  those  who  in 
sist  that  the  Republican  party  has  done  its  work,  and  therefore 
may  die.  Nothing  more  absurd.  It  has  done  a  great  and  ever- 
memorable  work;  but  much  remains  to  be  done."  He  then  re 
cited  its  achievements,  the  suppression  of  the  Rebellion,  equal 
rights  at  the  ballot  box  and  in  the  courts,  reconstruction,  home 
steads,  a  Pacific  Railroad,  reduction  of  the  national  debt  with 
out  repudiation  in  any  form,  and  reduced  taxation.  He  then 
added :  "  It  is  foolish  to  imagine  that  this  great  party,  conse 
crated  to  Human  Rights,  can  die.  It  will  live  as  long  as  people 
cherish  those  sublime  truths  declared  by  our  fathers,  of  which 
it  is  the  representative  and  guardian.  Its  special  work  will 
always  be  to  stand  by  the  nation  in  its  unity  and  by  the  people 
in  their  rights.  For  such  a  party  there  can  be  no  decay.  Men 
whom  I  now  address  may  grow  old,  but  the  Republican  Party 
will  be  ever  young."  In  conclusion  he  introduced  General 
Hawley,  of  Connecticut,  as  the  speaker  of  the  evening. 

Late  in  the  fall,  he  was  again  at  his  diversion  of  lecturing. 
He  prepared  a  lecture  on  the  war  between  France  and  Germany 
with  its  lesson  to  civilization.  He  delivered  it,  or  his  lecture  on 
Lafayette,  thirty-eight  times  between  the  middle  of  October  and 
the  opening  of  Congress  in  December,  reaching  west  from 
Boston  as  far  as  Chicago,  with  his  appointments,  and  netting 
himself  from  the  proceeds  more  than  seven  thousand  dollars. 
It  was  still  his  aim  to  meet  the  expenses  of  his  home  in  Wash- 

648 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  649 

ington  and  the  publication  of  his  works  without  encroaching 
upon  the  principal  of  his  modest  fortune. 

His  purpose  in  this  lecture  on  the  Franco-Prussian  war  was 
to  again  urge  the  folly  of  all  wars  and  the  necessity  of  a  policy 
of  peace  between  nations.  He  urged  as  the  first  step  towards 
this  end,  the  complete  disarmament  of  all  civilized  nations  and 
the  substitution  of  some  peaceful  tribunal  for  the  trial  of  in 
ternational  controversies.  He  recalled  the  folly  of  the  Em 
peror  Napoleon  III,  in  plunging  France  into  this  bloody  war, 
thereby  causing  himself  the  loss  of  his  crown  and  his  country 
the  loss  of  some  of  its  fairest  provinces,  as  illustrating  the 
necessity  of  some  better  method  of  settling  international  dis 
putes.  The  lecture  recalls  his  early  plea  for  peace,  before  the 
city  authorities  of  Boston. 

It  so  happened  that  the  first  measure  that  occupied  his  at 
tention  at  the  opening  of  the  next  Congress,  was  one  of  the 
troubles  that  grew  out  of  our  late  war.  It  was  an  application 
to  provide  for  the  return  of  the  Arlington  estate  to  the  family 
of  General  R.  E.  Lee  and  for  the  removal  of  the  graves  of  the 
Union  soldiers  buried  there  during  and  since  the  war.  Sum- 
ner  opposed  it  vigorously  in  a  speech  in  the  Senate.  He  was 
with  Secretary  Stanton,  when  he  made  the  order  for  the  burial 
of  the  Union  soldiers  on  this  estate.  The  Secretary  then  told 
Sumner  that  he  meant  to  bury  the  patriot  dead  there  in  per 
petual  guard  over  that  ground  so  that  no  person  of  the  family 
of  Lee  should  ever  dare  to  come  upon  it,  unless  to  encounter 
patriot  ghosts  counted  by  the  thousand."  The  application  to 
return  it  had  only  four  votes  in  its  favor,  while  there  were 
fifty-four  against  it.  The  purpose  of  the  great  Secretary  has 
held  to  this  day  and  the  use  to  which  he  devoted  this  ground 
will  probably  never  be  changed.  It  is  the  largest,  in  the  number 
of  its  dead  and  the  extent  of  its  grounds,  of  all  the  National 
cemeteries  and,  unlike  the  others,  it  is  yearly  increasing  the 
number  of  its  graves. 

The  prompt  opposition  of  Sumner  met  the  approval  of  Nast, 
the  cartoonist,  who  published  the  Senator's  picture  in  Harper's 
Weekly  and  sent  it  with  his  autograph  to  him  a  month  later. 

The  author  of  the  resolution  was  McCreery  of  Kentucky,  in 
description  of  whom  it  was  said  that  he  had  gained  "  prom 
inence  in  his  party  by  carefully  preparing  and  accurately  com 
mitting  to  memory,  a  political  oration  each  year  which  he  de 
livered  at  the  Democratic  convention  of  his  state."  Sumner 
said  the  resolution  was  a  warning  of  the  policy  this  party  would 
inaugurate,  "  which  would  take  the  old  Rebellion  by  the  hand 
and  install  it  in  the  high  places  of  power." 


650  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

These  expressions,  constantly  occurring,  show  the  deep  in 
terest  Sumner  felt  at  this  time  in  the  future  of  his  party.  He 
had  stood  by  its  cradle  and  seen  it  multiply  in  good  works  and 
in  strength.  With  hardly  concealed  pride  he  now  looked  upon 
its  position  and  thought  how  often  he  had  been  in  the  forefront 
of  the  battle  for  the  great  works  accomplished,  that  were  now 
recognized  as  its  titles  to  honor  and  confidence.  Little  did  he 
then  think,  as  such  things  recurred  to  him,  growing  old  and 
the  habit  of  retrospection  coming  on,  how  soon  the  scene  would 
change  and  the  contemplation  of  this  same  party,  in  the  hands 
of  new  men,  and  the  stab  at  him  would  bring  bitter  thoughts 
of  good  deeds  ill-requited. 

President  Grant  was  inaugurated  March  fourth,  1869.  At 
the  beginning  of  his  administration  he  was  attracted  to  proj 
ects  of  annexation.  The  revolution  in  Cuba  first  attracted  him 
to  that  island,  but  friends  of  the  administration  prevented  him 
from  extending  belligerent  rights  to  the  insurgents  and  with 
drew  his  attention  from  this  island.  Then  came  the  schemes 
for  annexation,  with  which  he  was  plied,  on  behalf  of  San 
Domingo.  He  had  hardly  been  inaugurated,  when  Baez,  the 
leader  of  one  faction  in  San  Domingo,  approached  him.  This 
island  had  been  torn  with  revolutions  for  many  years.  Prior 
to  this  time  it  had  been  divided  and  the  black  republic  of  Haiti 
occupied  the  western  portion  of  the  island,  the  other  and  larger 
part  being  occupied  by  that  of  San  Domingo.  The  two  rival 
chieftains  of  San  Domingo  were  Baez  and  Cabral.  Baez  hap 
pened  about  the  time  of  Grant's  inauguration  to  be  in  authority. 
But  his  rival  was  hovering  around  the  Haitian  border,  ready  to 
depose  him  as  soon  as  a  favorable  opportunity  presented. 

Realizing  the  uncertainty  of  his  office,  Baez  came  to  Washing 
ton  and  sought  the  annexation  of  the  country  to  the  United 
States.  He  had  previously  made  overtures  to  President  John 
son  and  Secretary  Seward,  but  had  been  referred  to  Sumner,  as 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  of  the  Sen 
ate,  who,  after  a  patient  hearing  of  his  scheme,  had  declined  to 
entertain  it.  Baez  was  a  native  of  the  island,  but  of  Spanish 
descent,  who  had  all  his  life  been  an  adventurer,  conspirator 
and  trickster,  without  patriotism  and  supremely  selfish  in  all 
his  schemes  in  connection  with  his  country,  tinder  favor  of 
the  successful  general  in  one  of  the  revolutions  of  Dominica 
he  had  obtained  an  election  to  the  Presidency,  but  scheming  to 
retain  it  beyond  the  constitutional  limit  of  his  term,  he  had 
been  driven  from  office  by  an  uprising  of  the  people.  His 
country  being  reannexed  to  Spain,  his  allegiance  was  purchased 
by  a  Major-General's  commission  in  the  Spanish  army.  This 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  651 

being  lost  by  another  revolution,  he  again  sought  and  obtained 
the  Presidency,  but  was  driven  from  it  in  less  than  a  year, 
by  another  popular  uprising,  on  the  ground  that  he  was  not 
the  free  choice  of  the  people,  but  was  imposed  upon  them  by 
an  armed  force.  His  rival  was  elected  and  Baez  then  came  to 
Washington  to  see  Johnson  and  Seward.  Not  succeeding,  two 
years  later,  he  engaged  in  another  revolution  and  was  again  suc 
cessful  in  reaching  the  supreme  authority.  But  knowing  the 
uncertain  tenure  by  which  it  was  held,  he  now  sought  to  sell 
out  to  President  Grant. 

General  Grant  was  untried  in  civil  life  and  was  more  open 
to  his  arguments  than  Johnson  and  Seward  had  been.  He  en 
tered  upon  a  negotiation,  which  became  one  of  the  best  known 
of  his  administration,  regretted,  perhaps,  as  much  by  his  friends 
as  his  enemies.  In  July,  1869,  he  sent  General  Babcock,  one 
of  his  private  secretaries,  to  San  Domingo,  ostensibly  to  inquire 
into  the  condition  and  resources  of  the  island.  His  printed  in 
structions  did  not  contemplate  more.  But  Babcock,  in  fact, 
went  farther  and  negotiated  two  treaties,  one  for  the  annexation 
of  San  Domingo  and  another  for  the  lease  of  the  bay  and  pen 
insula  of  Samana.  They  were  both  concluded  on  the  twenty- 
ninth  day  of  November,  1869.  President  Grant  afterwards  ap 
proved  what  he  had  done,  though  Babcock's  printed  instructions 
did  not  authorize  his  action. 

On  this  mission  Babcock  was  accompanied  by  two  war-ships 
of  the  United  States.  The  one  in  which  he  sailed  was  under 
orders  to  furnish  him  every  attention  and  facility  in  the  per 
formance  of  his  duty  and  the  moral  support  of  its  guns.  The 
other  was  placed  at  his  disposal. 

Showing  the  unfitness  of  Babcock  for  such  duties,  he  signed 
his  own  name  to  the  protocol,  entitling  himself  "  Aide-de-camp 
to  his  Excellency  General  Grant,  President  of  the  United  States 
of  America/'  there  being  no  such  official,  civil  or  military 
known  to  the  government.  The  protocol  had  the  further  very 
unusual  provision  in  it  that  "  his  Excellency,  General  Grant, 
President  of  the  United  States,  promises,  privately,  to  use  all 
his  influence  in  order  that  the  idea  of  annexing  the  Dominican 
Republic  to  the  United  States  may  acquire  such  a  degree  of 
popularity  among  members  of  Congress  as  will  be  necessary  for 
its  accomplishment."  In  other  words  the  chief  magistrate  of 
a  great  nation  was  committed  to  the  use  of  his  private  influence 
with  other  high  officials  to  procure  them  to  ratify  a  treaty  of 
annexation.  The  suggestion  is  apparent  that  he  had  gone  too 
far.  The  President  should  have  been  left  to  the  conscientious 
discharge  of  his  high  duties  and  the  others  allowed  an  equally 


G52  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

conscientious  discharge  of  theirs,  untrammelled  by  pressure 
from  any  source. 

In  a  letter  of  Babcock,  announcing  the  conclusion  of  the 
treaties  for  the  annexation  of  San  Domingo  and  the  lease  of 
Samana,  to  Lieutenant-Commander  Bunce  of  the  United  States 
vessel  Nantasket,  he  wrote :  "  In  this  negotiation  the  President 
has  guaranteed  to  the  Dominican  Republic  protection  from  all 
foreign  interposition  during  the  time  specified  in  the  treaties 
for  submitting  the  same  to  the  people  of  the  Dominican  Re 
public," — a  guaranty  the  President  had  no  right  to  make. 
Babcock  further  made  the  statement  that,  for  this  purpose,  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  had  been  directed  to  place  three  armed 
vessels  in  the  harbor  of  San  Domingo,  subject  to  his  (Bab- 
cock's)  instructions.  He  accordingly  wrote  that  he  would  raise 
the  United  States  flag  on  the  island  and  leave  a  guard  with  it, 
and  he  directed  Bunce  to  use  all  his  force  to  carry  out  to  the 
letter  the  guaranty  of  the  President,  if  he  found  any  foreign 
intervention  threatened.  Bunce  was  further  directed  to  in 
form  any  people  intending  intervention  that  such  a  step  would 
be  regarded  as  an  unfriendly  act  towards  the  United  States. 

No  treaty  having  been  ratified  by  the  Senate,  this  of  course 
meant  a  taking  of  military  possession  of  Dominica  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  without  any  warrant  given  him 
to  do  so.  The  President  was  virtually  making  war  upon 
Dominica,  without  the  consent  of  Congress,  which  alone,  under 
the  Constitution  had  the  power  to  declare  war.  Only  the  in 
experience  of  President  Grant  can  explain  and  atone  for  these 
unauthorized  acts  done  in  his  name  and  afterwards  approved  by 
him. 

Two  months  later,  on  the  twenty-ninth  day  of  January,  1870, 
Rear  Admiral  Poor  was  directed  by  the  Navy  Department  to 
proceed  from  Key  West,  Florida,  with  two  United  States  war 
ships,  the  Severn  and  Dictator  to  Port-au-Prince  in  Haiti  and 
inform  the  Haitian  authorities  that  the  United  States  Govern 
ment  was  determined  to  protect  the  existing  government  of 
Dominica,  with  all  its  power,  then  to  proceed  to  Dominica  and 
protect  it  against  any  power  attempting  to  interfere  with  it, 
to  then  visit  Samana  and  see  the  United  States  authority  se 
cure  there  and  if  the  Haitians  attacked  Dominica,  with  their 
ships  to  destroy  or  capture  them. 

Here  was  an  open  confession  of  possession  taken,  by  the 
United  States,  of  Dominica  arid  a  threat  against  the  Black 
Republic  of  Haiti  if  it  interfered  with  this  possession,  and  an 
active  war  movement  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  under  in 
structions  from  the  President  to  support  both. 


LIFE   OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  653 

On  February  ninth,  1870,  the  Navy  Department  issued  an 
order  to  Commodore  Green  of  the  ship  Congress,  with  an  arm 
ament  of  fourteen  nine-inch  guns  and  two  sixty-pounders, 
saying  that,  while  the  treaty  was  pending,  the  United  States 
agreed  to  sustain  the  Dominican  people  against  their  enemies 
in  the  island  and  in  revolution  against  the  lawfully  constituted 
Government  and  commanding  him  to  resist  any  attempts  by  its 
enemies  to  invade  its  territories  by  land  or  sea.  Of  course  this 
was  a  declaration  to  sustain  the  tottering  supremacy  of  Baez. 
The  threat  against  the  invaders  of  Dominica  by  land  could 
only  be  against  the  Black  Republic  of  Haiti.  There  being  no 
other  government  on  the  island,  there  could  be  no  invasion  by 
land,  except  from  its  territory.  Baez,  a  little  later  confessed 
his  own  weakness,  by  notifying  Rear-Admiral  Poor,  that  if 
annexation  was  delayed  it  would  be  absolutely  necessary  for  him 
to  call  upon  the  United  States  Government  for  aid.  The  Rear- 
Admiral  a  little  later  reported  that  to  protect  the  Dominican 
Government  he  had  found  it  necessary  to  send  armed  vessels  to 
different  parts  of  the  island,  one  to  the  north-west,  one  to 
Puerto  Plata,  one  to  Samana,  one  to  San  Domingo.  Lieuten 
ant-Commander  Bunce  went  so  far  as  to  threaten  foreigners 
in  the  island,  that,  if  with  their  aid  any  one  hostile  to  the 
Dominican  Government  should  get  possession  of  Puerto  Plata 
the  naval  force  of  the  United  States  would  retake  it,  though 
the  foreigners  might  be  the  greatest  sufferers. 

This  was  an  altogether  unjustifiable  interference  with  the 
affairs  of  peaceable  and  friendly  neighboring  nations.  It  was 
all  confessedly  done,  at  the  instance  and  under  the  authority 
of  President  Grant.  No  one  now  attempts  to  assert,  that,  in 
it  all,  he  acted  from  any  dishonest  or  unworthy  motive.  Sum- 
ner  never  claimed  that  he  did.  The  President  sincerely  be 
lieved,  that,  in  the  acquisition  of  this  territory,  with  its  prod 
uct  of  sugar  and  coffee  and  the  home  it  would  furnish  to  a 
portion  of  our  black  population,  great  advantage  was  to  be  de 
rived  from  its  annexation  to  our  country.  He  clung  tenaciously 
to  the  scheme  and  only  relinquished  it,  when  hopelessly  de 
feated  during  his  Presidency;  and  he  recurred  to  it  again,  as 
if  to  remove  every  suspicion  of  insincerity  on  his  part,  in  those 
last  pages  of  his  Memoirs  written  under  the  very  shadow  of 
death.  But  Sumner  did  believe  that  he  was  acting  without 
authority  and  that  he  was  making  a  wholly  improper  use  of 
the  machinery  of  the  Government  that  was  placed  under  his 
immediate  control  and  that  he  was  entirely  mistaken  as  to  the 
value  of  the  island.  Sumner  was  likewise  thoroughly  convinced 
of  the  insincere  character  and  selfish  purposes  of  Baez,  who 


(55-1  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

was  expecting  to  reap  a  large  pecuniary  benefit  to  himself  al 
though  he  was  only  maintained  in  power  by  the  President  and 
was  therefore  able  to  give  nothing  for  what  he  was  to  receive. 

The  negotiations  were  secretly  conducted  and  Sumner  did 
not  know  of  their  existence,  until  they  had  been  in  progress 
for  six  months.  The  first  intimation  he  had  of  them  was  from 
the  President  himself.  It  was  during  the  holiday  recess  of 
Congress,  at  the  close  of  the  year  1869.  He  was  seated  one 
evening  at  table  in  his  own  house,  in  Washington,  with  two 
friends,  J.  W.  Forney  of  the  Philadelphia  Press,  and  Ben 
Perley  Poore,  another  journalist,  when  the  President  called. 
His  voice  was  recognized  by  Sumner,  who  went  to  the  door  and 
returned  with  him  to  the  table.  The  guests  made  a  movement 
as  if  to  leave,  but  were  motioned  to  remain,  by  the  President, 
who  took  a  seat  with  them  at  the  table.  The  whole  party  went 
together,  in  a  few  minutes,  from  the  dining-room  to  the 
library  adjoining.  President  Grant  introduced  the  subject  by 
alluding  to  certain  new  treaties  already  negotiated.  He  showed 
his  inexperience  in  Congressional  proceedings,  by  referring  to 
Sumner  several  times  as  chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committee, 
adding  that  the  treaties  would  come  before  the  Judiciary  Com 
mittee  and  that  he,  therefore,  wished  to  speak  with  him  on  the 
subject.  He  then  commenced  an  explanation  of  the  treaties. 
After  he  had  proceeded  some  length,  Sumner  not  wishing  to 
commit  himself  on  the  treaties  and  having  a  letter  from  his 
friend  J.  M.  Ashley,  who  had  recently  been  removed  from  his 
place  as  Governor  of  Montana,  of  which  he  wished  to  speak 
to  the  President,  changed  the  subject  to  that  and  after  a  few 
words,  read  a  portion  of  the  letter  to  him,  when,  thinking  the 
President  was  becoming  restless  and  that  he  was  perhaps  pur 
suing  the  subject  too  far,  in  his  own  house,  he  stopped  and  the 
President  again  reverted  to  the  treaties.  The  talk  about  the 
treaties  was  very  general  and  left  on  Sumner's  mind  no  very 
defined  idea  of  what  they  contained  and  gave  no  information  of 
the  character  of  the  negotiations.  Sumner  was,  therefore,  cau 
tious  in  committing  himself.  His  answer  was,  as  he  distinctly 
remembered  it :  "  Mr.  President,  I  am  an  Administration 
man  and  whatever  you  do  will  always  find  in  me  the  most 
careful  and  candid  consideration."  The  President  shortly 
after  left  the  house. 

This  conversation  became  important,  for  it  was  afterwards 
claimed  by  the  President  and  his  friends,  that  Sumner  then 
gave  assurance  that  he  would  support  the  treaties  and  after 
wards  disappointed  the  President  by  opposing  them.  But  this 
conclusion  of  the  President  was  probably  born  of  his  inex- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  655 

perience  in  such  matters.  To  one  familiar  with  the  caution  of 
public  officers,  in  expressing  themselves  upon  matters  that  are 
yet  to  come  before  them  officially,  for  determination,  it  would 
seem  very  improbable  that  Sumner  would  commit  himself  to 
the  support  of  treaties  that  he  had  not  even  read.  He  had  then 
been  in  the  Senate  for  twenty  years  and  for  ten  of  them  he  had 
been  chairman  of  one  of  its  most  important  committees,  the 
one  having  the  first  consideration  to  give  to  treaties  and  the 
first  disposition  to  make  of  them.  He  was  noticeably  careful 
and  independent  of  Executive  control.  Even  before  his  en 
trance  to  public  life  his  associations  had  been  for  many  years 
with  attorneys  and  judges,  among  whom  the  impropriety  of 
such  a  premature  expression  would  have  been  obvious  and  well 
understood.  Sumner  would  have  been  the  last,  from  whom 
such  an  expression  could  have  been  expected,  and  the  conclusion 
from  the  evidence  of  those  present  is  irresistible  that  he  did  not 
give  it.  When  chided  afterwards  in  the  Senate  with  having 
said  such  a  thing  to  President  Grant,  Sumner' s  answer  was: 
"  Never !  He  may  have  formed  this  opinion,  but  never  did  I  say 
anything  to  justify  it ;  nor  did  I  suppose  he  could  have  failed  to 
appreciate  the  reserve  with  which  I  spoke."  And  he  again 
reiterated  the  statement  he  did  make  and  said  he  was  positive 
in  his  recollection  of  it,  because  it  was  early  fixed  in  his  mind. 
Sumner  first  saw  the  treaties  on  the  day  following  the  call  of 
the  President  at  his  house.  They  were  brought  to  him  by  Bab- 
cock  and  were  soon  after  sent  to  the  Senate  where  they  were 
referred  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  When  they 
were  first  laid  before  the  committee,  it  was  apparent  there  was  a 
large  majority  of  it  against  them.  Only  one  member,  Morton, 
said  anything  in  their  favor.  Before  they  separated  Sumner 
expressed  the  hope  that  nothing  be  said,  by  the  members,  of  the 
talk  in  the  committee  and  that  no  vote  be  taken  at  that  time. 
Seeing  the  feeling  of  the  committee,  he  wished  that  nothing  be 
done  which  could  be  construed  as  hasty  or  unfriendly  towards 
the  Administration.  Sumner  had  promised  the  President  that 
they  should  have  a  careful  and  candid  consideration,  and  he  did 
not  for  several  weeks  express  any  opinion  about  them  in  the 
committee.  He  did  not  then  know  how  the  President  had  set 
his  heart  upon  annexation,  but  he  wished  if  the  treaties  were  to 
be  rejected  that  there  should  be  as  little  friction  as  possible  in 
doing  it  and  that  it  be  done  after  a  quiet  and  respectful  con 
sideration,  believing  that  such  a  way  of  doing  it  would  be  the 
most  agreeable  to  the  Administration.  He  afterwards,  in  the 
Senate,  appealed  to  his  colleagues  on  the  committee,  to  say 
whether  his  course  there  had  not  been  above  criticism,  patriotic, 


656  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

as  well  as  always  just  and  considerate  towards  the  President. 
And  there  was  no  one  to  question  his  claim  that  it  had  been  so. 

The  report  of  the  committee,  as  has  been  foreshadowed,  was 
adverse.  It  was  presented  by  Sumner  as  chairman.  On  the 
thirtieth  day  of  June,  1870,  the  Senate  also  rejected  them  by  a 
vote  of  twenty-eight  to  twenty-eight,  a  vote  of  two-thirds  being 
required  to  ratify  them.  Sumner  was  not  in  favor  of  annexa 
tion  and  indeed  the  sentiment  of  the  Senate  had  been  for  some 
years  opposed  to  the  acquisition  of  territory  to  the  South. 
Slavery  had  pressed  such  acquisition  so  long  and  so  far,  as  a 
means  of  extending  its  territory  and  increasing  its  votes  in 
Congress,  that  it  had  developed  a  settled  opposition  in  the 
North  to  expansion  in  that  direction.  Sumner  shared  in  this 
feeling.  Indeed  annexation  would  not  have  had  the  vote  it  did, 
except  for  the  subserviency  of  some  Senators  to  Executive  in 
fluence.  Many  Senators  from  the  South  then  held  their  places 
by  a  very  uncertain  tenure  and  looked  to  the  President  to  pro 
vide  places  for  them  when  their  terms  were  ended. 

But  there  were  other  reasons  why  Sumner  was  opposed  to 
annexation.  He  was  the  champion  of  the  colored  race  in  the 
Senate.  For  many  years  he  had  battled  hard  to  abolish  slavery 
and  establish  for  this  race  complete  equality  in  civil  rights. 
The  island  of  Haiti  was  peopled  by  the  colored  race.  The 
western  part  of  it  was  occupied  by  the  Black  Republic  of  Haiti. 
It  had  been  an  object  of  tender  interest  to  Sumner  for  many 
years.  In  1862,  he  had  carried,  in  the  Senate,  a  resolution 
acknowledging  her  independence  and  he  also  secured  the  pas 
sage  of  a  bill  to  authorize  the  appointment  of  a  Minister  to  the 
Republic.  In  both  instances  he  encountered  and  overcame  a 
determined  opposition.  He  was  not  willing  that  this  experi 
ment  of  the  black  race  in  self-government  should  be  destroyed. 
Though  this  was  not  a  direct  destruction  of  the  little  republic, 
it  was  only  reasonable  to  conclude  that  this  result  would  cer 
tainly  follow  the  step  that  was  proposed.  Two  powers  so  un 
equal  in  strength  as  the  United  States  and  Haiti  could  not  be 
expected  to  long  occupy  the  same  island,  and  the  prediction  was 
freely  made  during  the  discussion  that  the  annexation  of  the 
one  would  be  speedily  followed  by  the  absorption  of  the  other. 
It  was  very  natural  for  Sumner  to  develop  a  strong  opposition 
to  a  measure  that  promised  such  results. 

But  he  did  not  anticipate  the  strength  of  the  feeling,  in  its 
favor,  with  President  Grant.  Such  schemes  had  been  easily 
taken  up  and  as  easily  put  aside,  during  the  administration  of 
both  Johnson  and  Lincoln.  Sumner  anticipated  nothing  more 
now  and  supposed  that  the  matter,  being  gently  treated  by  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  657 

Senate,  in  its  rejection,  would  disappear  and  nothing  more  be 
thought  of  it.  But  in  this  he  miscalculated. 

General  Grant  was  surprised  and  chagrined  at  the  action  of 
the  Senate.  He  was  so  thoroughly  convinced  of  the  importance 
of  the  acquisition  that  he  was  not  prepared  for  its  rejection  and 
was  inclined  to  attribute  the  result  to  improper  motives  of  those 
who  opposed  him.  And  here  he  made  another  mistake,  which 
afterwards  caused  additional  feeling  among  those  who  differed 
from  him  sincerely  and  felt  that  he  had  been  already  making 
an  improper  use  of  the  Navy.  Notwithstanding  the  rejection 
of  the  treaty,  the  protection  of  the  Navy  was  still  continued  to 
Baez.  One  naval  officer  in  that  service  expressed  the  opinion 
that  the  withdrawal  of  our  support  would  be  followed  by  a 
revolt  against  him.  Baez  himself,  seeming  to  realize  this,  asked 
the  presence  of  our  ships  at  different  points  on  the  island  and 
they  were  sent.  So  that  the  opponents  of  annexation  believed 
he  was  continued  in  power  by  the  President. 

This  was  the  situation  when  at  the  opening  of  Congress  in 
December,  1870,  the  President  recurred  to  the  subject  again  in 
his  Message  and  apparently  with  renewed  confidence.  He  had 
extravagantly  predicted  that  the  territory  would  yield  all  the 
sugar,  coffee,  tobacco  and  tropical  products,  the  United  States 
would  consume,  and  could  furnish  us  these  articles  of  everyday 
life  at  cheaper  rates  than  ever  before,  would  aid  materially  in 
correcting  the  balance  of  trade  against  us  with  foreign  nations 
and  aid  us  in  the  race  for  greatness  with  other  countries.  He 
now  predicted  that,  as  soon  as  it  was  known  that  the  United 
States  had  abandoned  the  project  of  annexation,  a  free  port 
would  be  negotiated  for,  in  the  Bay  of  Samana,  by  European 
nations,  and  a  large  commercial  city  would  spring  up  there,  to 
which  we  would  be  tributary,  without  corresponding  benefits. 
This  and  other  calamities,  he  thought,  would  flow  from  the 
failure  of  annexation.  He  therefore  recommended  that  he  be 
authorized  to  appoint  a  commission  to  negotiate  a  treaty  for 
the  acquisition  of  the  island. 

This  at  once  opened  the  whole  subject  up  anew  and  caused 
an  explosion  of  the  pent-up  feeling,  with  which  Members  had 
regarded  the  action  of  the  President  and  the  use  made  of  the 
Navy,  after  the  rejection  of  the  project  of  annexation,  six 
months  before.  So  intense  was  the  opposition,  that  the  Pres 
ident's  friends  did  not  even  discuss  the  measure  he  recom 
mended,  but  contented  themselves  in  their  effort  to  satisfy  him 
with  a  much  milder  substitute.  On  the  twelfth  of  December, 
1870,  Morton,  of  Indiana,  offered,  in  the  Senate,  a  resolution 
empowering  the  President  to  appoint  three  commissioners  to 


658  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

proceed  to  San  Domingo  and  inquire  into  the  political  con 
dition  of  the  island,  its  agricultural  and  commercial  value  and 
report  to  the  President.  The  commissioners  were  to  receive  no 
compensation,  but  their  expenses  were  to  be  paid  and  a  sec 
retary  was  to  be  provided  for  them.  Even  to  this  there  was 
vigorous  opposition,  in  both  the  Senate  and  the  House. 

Four  days  after  the  receipt  of  the  President's  message,  Sum- 
ner  offered  a  resolution  in  the  Senate  calling  for  copies  of  all 
instructions  to  any  agent,  consul  or  naval  commander  of  the 
United  States  with  their  reports,  and  of  all  treaties  or  pro 
tocols,  relating  to  the  annexation,  and  asking  for  an  account 
of  the  debts  of  the  Dominican  Government  and  for  any  infor 
mation  in  the  possession  of  the  Administration  to  show  that 
any  European  power  intended  to  acquire  a  foothold  there. 
Thus  far  he  had  not  discussed  annexation  publicly.  In  the 
secret  session  of  the  Senate  he  spoke  temperately  against  it; 
lying  in  the  tropics  and  peopled  by  the  blacks,  of  right  belong 
ing  to  them,  he  believed  that  they  should  be  encouraged  to 
hold  it  and  complete  their  experiment  of  self-government, 
already  begun  in  the  island.  He  made  only  a  passing  reference 
to  the  unlawful  use  that  had  been  made  of  the  navy  in  the 
waters  of  the  island,  while  the  negotiations  were  pending.  He 
had  contented  himself  with  a  respectful  and  quiet,  but  firm, 
opposition  to  the  measure.  His  attitude  as  well  as  his  in 
fluence  and  leadership  had,  however,  been  well  known  to  the 
President  and  much  effort  had  been  made  to  convert  him 
before  any  vote  was  taken. 

The  agent  of  the  President  who  undertook  to  accomplish  his 
conversion  was  Secretary  Fish.  He  had  repeated  interviews 
with  Sumner  on  the  subject,  in  which  he,  urgently  and  at 
length,  argued  the  question  with  him,  at  his  house  in  Washing 
ton.  Sumner  found  Fish  at  first  seemingly  indifferent  person 
ally,  but  inclined  to  accommodate  the  President.  As  the  inter 
views  progressed,  Fish's  interest  increased.  Sumner  argued 
that  he  and  the  President  were  both  wrong,  that  Baez  was  cor 
rupt,  that  his  country  was  weak  and  that  instead  of  taking 
advantage  of  these  circumstances  they  should  encourage  and 
assist  the  blacks  in  an  effort  to  improve  their  condition  and  that 
when  the  question  came  up  for  consideration  in  the  Senate  he 
could  conscientiously  pursue  no  other  course.  Finding  him 
determined,  Fish  finally  at  one  of  their  interviews,  protracted 
late  into  the  night  at  Sumner's  house,  shortly  before  the  vote 
was  taken,  said  to  Sumner  that  if  he  felt  in  this  way,  why  not 
leave  the  Senate?  "Why  not  go  to  London?  I  offer  you  the 
English  Mission.  It  is  yours."  Surprised  at  this  offer  of  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  BUHNER  659 

Secretary  of  State,  Sumner  simply  answered,  "  We  have  a 
Minister  there  who  cannot  be  bettered."  Thus  early  was  it  in 
dicated  that  the  English  Mission,  then  held  by  Mr.  Motley, 
would  depend  upon  the  result  of  annexation.  Sumner  still 
argued  that  it  was  wrong  and  that  if  the  President  insisted 
upon  him  pressing  it,  he  should  refuse ;  and  resign  his  place  in 
the  Cabinet,  rather  than  do  it.  But  Fish  answered  that  he  felt 
differently,  that  he  had  taken  office  under  the  President  and  felt 
obliged  to  further  his  wishes  and,  moreover,  that  General 
Grant,  by  his  personal  influence,  had  carried  the  election  for 
the  Republicans  and  that  they  owed  something  to  him  in  return. 

The  substance  of  these  conversations  was  of  course  commu 
nicated  to  the  President,  by  his  Secretary,  and  when,  at  last, 
the  vote  was  taken  and  the  treaty  rejected,  the  full  measure  of 
his  resentment  became  apparent.  The  next  day  Mr.  Motley  was 
removed  from  his  place  as  Minister  to  England.  This  was  at 
once  recognized  as  a  thrust  at  Sumner,  for  Motley  was  a  res 
ident  of  Boston  and  had  been  approved,  for  the  place,  by  Sum 
ner.  The  indignity  of  the  act  as  a  punishment  for  mere 
Senatorial  independence  of  Executive  control  was  afterwards 
sought  to  be  concealed  and  explained  away  by  the  Secretary, 
when  its  impropriety  and  unfairness  had  become  a  matter  of 
public  comment.  It  was  then  said  that  Motley's  recall  was 
owing  to  the  death  of  Lord  Clarendon,  the  English  Foreign 
Secretary.  But  the  Philadelphia  correspondent  of  the  London 
Times  had  foreshadowed  the  removal  as  about  to  happen,  in 
his  dispatches  to  his  paper,  two  days  before  his  Lordship's 
death  and  when  it  was  entirely  unexpected.  It  was  also  said 
the  recall  was  owing  to  Motley's  position  on  the  Alabama  ques 
tion.  But  the  Secretary  had  already  expressed  his  satisfaction 
with  the  Minister's  position  and  besides,  these  negotiations  had 
been  transferred  to  Washington,  so  that  the  Secretary  could 
act  as  one  of  the  American  Commissioners  and  the  Senators, 
who  would  have  to  ratify  any  treaty  made,  could  be  conferred 
with,  during  its  progress.  Therefore  the  Alabama  claims  ques 
tion  had  already,  for  other  causes,  been  taken  out  of  the  Eng 
lish  Minister's  hands.  The  cause  for  Motley's  removal  was  so 
apparent,  that  the  attempt  to  conceal  it  only  made  its  un 
pardonable  character  more  apparent  and  it  has  passed  into 
history  as  one  of  the  mistakes  of  Grant's  Administration. 

The  renewal  of  the  contest  for  annexation  by  the  President  in 
his  Message  to  Congress,  naturally  found  Sumner  in  no  humor 
to  abandon  his  position.  Some  words  spoken  by  the  President 
and  Babcock,  showing  a  disposition  to  call  Sumner  to  account 
for  his  action,  did  not  improve  the  feeling  between  them.  In- 


660  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

deed  Congress  regretted  the  return  of  the  President  to  the  ques 
tion  after  the  decisive  defeat  he  had  sustained  in  June.  But 
if  the  question  had  to  be  met  again  there  was  some  disposition 
to  meet  and  dispose  of  it  promptly.  Sumner  sought  to  secure 
an  early  consideration  of  his  resolution,  asking  information 
from  the  Departments.  But  there  was  a  disposition  to  con 
ciliate  the  President  by  appointing  a  commission  to  investigate 
the  condition  and  value  of  the  island  and  hence  that  was  taken 
up  for  consideration  first,  Sumner  opposed  it  and  on  Decem 
ber  twenty-first,  spoke  against  it.  He  spoke  without  manuscript 
and  only  from  a  few  notes,  but  with  some  earnestness,  remind 
ing  his  hearers  of  the  old-time  fire  he  had  shown  in  his  anti- 
slavery  speeches  before  the  war.  As  might  have  been  expected, 
he  used  some  expressions  that  grated  on  the  ears  of  the  Presi 
dent  and  his  friends,  and  that  it  would  have  been  better  to 
omit. 

He  said  the  resolution  committed  Congress  <e  to  a  dance  of 
blood,"  and  was  "  a  new  step  in  a  measure  of  violence."  He 
referred  to  Baez  as  "  a  political  jockey  "  and  to  his  partners  in 
the  scheme,  Cazneau  and  Fabens,  as  "  two  other  political 
jockeys "  and  the  three  together  as  "  a  precious  copartner 
ship  ",  who  had  seduced  into  their  firm  a  young  officer  of  ours, 
who  entitled  himself  "  Aide-de-camp  to  his  Excellency,  General 
Ulysses  S.  Grant,  President  of  the  United  States  of  America  ", 
pausing  to  play  on  this  pretentious  title,  inquiring  if  any  one 
knew  of  any  such  officer  appearing  anywhere  under  the  Con 
stitution,  the  statutes  or  in  the  history  of  the  Eepublic,  until 
the  appearance  of  Babcock.  He  commented  on  his  protocol, 
binding  the  President  "  privately  to  use  all  his  influence  "  with 
Congress  to  accomplish  annexation.  He  referred  to  one  of  our 
Commodores,  acting  under  instructions  from  the  Administra 
tion  in  threatening  Haiti,  in  terms  not  calculated  to  conciliate 
General  Grant,  when  he  said :  (<  In  what  school  was  our  Com 
modore  raised?  The  prudent  mother,  in  the  story,  cautioned 
her  son  to  take  care  never  to  fight  with  a  boy  of  his  own  size." 
He  drew  a  parallel  between  annexation  as  attempted  and  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  Bill  and  the  Lecompton  Constitution,  under 
President  Pierce,  by  which  it  was  proposed  to  introduce  slavery 
into  Kansas,  against  the  will  of  her  people.  And  he  continued 
the  parallel,  when  he  spoke  of  Grant's  rumored  effort  to  secure 
the  ratification  of  the  treaty  of  annexation,  by  changing  the 
membership  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  as  in  like 
ness  to  the  removal  of  Douglas  from  his  committee,  at  the  in 
stance  of  President  Buchanan,  when  serving  the  slave  power. 
Counsel  the  President  he  said  "  to  shun  all  approach  to  the  ex- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  661 

ample  of  Franklin  Pierce,  James  Buchanan  and  Andrew  John 
son."  He  quoted  from  one  familiar  with  the  island,  to  show 
that  to  receive  it  from  Baez,  while  its  most  numerous,  intelli 
gent  and  wealthy  citizens,  the  leading  men  of  the  country,  were 
in  prison,  in  exile  or  in  arms  against  him  and  having  no  voice  in 
the  transfer  would  result  in  terrible  disaster.  "  No  prudent 
man  buys  a  lawsuit,"  he  said,  "  but  we  are  called  upon  to  buy  a 
bloody  lawsuit."  And  he  again  protested  "against  this  legis 
lation  as  another  stage  in  a  drama  of  blood." 

Some  of  these  are  strong  expressions.  But  Sumner  felt 
strongly  upon  this  question.  He  was  contending  against  what 
he  felt  was  a  great  wrong  threatened,  against  the  improper 
exercise  of  authority,  against  a  powerful  and  determined  ad 
versary — backed  by  the  patronage  of  a  great  office.  In  such  an 
unequal  contest,  powerful  weapons  had  to  be  used  or  defeat 
was  certain.  All  of  the  expressions  that  were  objected  to  at  the 
time  have  been  given  as  well  as  the  others,  to  which  exception 
could  be  taken,  that  the  reader  may  be  able  to  judge,  whether 
the  President's  subsequent  conduct  was  justified  or  not. 

These  were  only  heated  expressions  thrown  off  in  the  course 
of  the  speech.  The  body  of  the  speech  was  a  vigorous  argument 
against  the  proposed  measure.  He  argued  that  it  was  intended 
to  commit  Congress  to  annexation,  for  the  President  already 
had  power  to  appoint  agents  to  visit  foreign  countries  and 
a  secret  service  fund  provided,  with  which  to  pay  them.  So 
that  if  it  was  only  information  that  was  desired,  the  President 
already  had  the  means  of  procuring  it  at  his  disposal.  He 
enumerated  instances  when  other  Presidents  had  appointed 
these  agents,  informally  called  Commissioners,  to  obtain  in 
formation  which  was  afterwards  communicated  to  Congress. 
He  expressly  declined  to  discuss  whether  the  territory  was 
desirable  or  what  were  its  resources  or  its  debts.  But  he  dis 
cussed  at  length  the  nature  of  the  negotiations  thus  far,  and  the 
improper  means  used  to  maintain  Baez  in  power  against  the 
will  of  the  people  of  Dominica,  the  want  of  authority  of  Baez 
and  Babcock  to  negotiate  a  treaty  or  protocol  and  the  improper 
character  of  the  one  they  had  negotiated  and  signed.  He 
argued  and  cited  authorities  to  prove  that  our  ships  had  no 
right  in  the  waters  of  the  island  until  a  treaty  had  been  ratified 
by  the  Senate.  He  objected  to  their  presence  there  as  a  menace 
to  the  independence  of  the  Black  Republic  of  Haiti  and  dwelt 
on  the  part  of  the  President's  Message  which  proposed  to  annex 
the  island.  This  would  include  of  necessity  the  territory  oc 
cupied  by  the  Haitians.  He  showed  that  this  territory  had 
already  been  threatened  by  our  navy.  It  would  be  in  vain,  he 


662  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

urged,  to  set  forth  commercial  and  material  advantages  to 
accrue,  when  right  and  humanity  were  thus  sacrificed.  The 
island,  he  said,  belonged  to  the  colored  race  by  right  of  posses 
sion  and  by  tropical  position  and  it  was  our  plain  duty  to  aid 
and  protect  them,  in  an  independence  there,  which  was  as 
precious  to  them  as  ours  is  to  us. 

At  the  close  of  Sumner's  speech,  the  Senate  adjourned  till 
evening  and  then  the  debate  was  renewed.  All  night  long  it 
continued  and  Sumner's  speech  was  the  subject  of  varied  criti 
cism.  Chandler  charged  him  with  going  over  to  the  Democratic 
party  and  with  having  violated  a  pledge  to  support  annexation, 
given  the  President  a  year  before.  Nye  charged  that  he  was 
opposing  an  inquiry  to  discover  the  true  worth  of  the  proposed 
possession  and  he  and  Morton  insisted  that  he  had  assailed  the 
President  and  had  made  an  unfavorable  comparison  between 
him  and  other  Presidents.  Conkling  foreshadowed  the  purpose 
of  the  friends  of  the  Administration  to  remove  him  from  the 
chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations.  In  the 
midst  of  this  onslaught,  Thurman,  from  the  other  side,  quietly 
reminded  them  that  the  Senator  they  were  now  dismissing 
from  their  party,  had  stood  alone  in  that  body  in  1850,  and 
that  since  then,  sixty  had  come  to  follow  implicitly  his  leader 
ship.  To  the  charge  of  Chandler  that  he  had  not  kept  faith 
with  the  President,  Sumner  answered,  giving  the  interview  as 
it  has  already  been  narrated  in  these  pages.  He  denied  the 
claim,  made  by  Nye  and  Morton,  that  he  had  assailed  the  Presi 
dent  and  insisted  that  he  had  alluded  to  him  as  little  as  possible 
and  never  except  in  strict  subordination  to  the  main  question, 
that  he  had  only  put  the  case  upon  the  facts  and  he  asked  again, 
whether  Baez  was  not  maintained  in  power  by  the  arms  of  the 
United  States.  A  running  debate  also  occurred  between  him 
and  other  Senators,  particularly  Edmunds,  who  showed  some 
feeling.  At  last,  at  half  past  six  in  the  morning,  a  vote  was 
taken,  thirty  Senators  being  absent.  The  resolution  was  carried 
by  a  vote  of  thirty-two  to  nine.  After  some  debate  it  was  also 
passed  by  the  House,  but  not  until  it  was  amended  so  as  to 
declare  that  Congress  was  not  to  be  considered  by  this  action 
as  committing  itself  to  annexation.  The  Senate  concurred  in 
the  amendment,  Sumner  voting  for  it. 

Under  this  resolution  the  President  appointed  Benjamin  F. 
Wade,  of  Ohio,  Andrew  D.  White,  of  New  York,  and  Samuel 
G.  Howe,  of  Massachusetts,  as  Commissioners  to  visit  San 
Domingo  and  report  upon  the  condition  of  its  people,  their 
disposition  toward  annexation,  the  resources  of  the  country,  its 
debts,  etc.  A  place  on  the  Commission  was  offered  to  Professor 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  663 

Agassiz,  but  he  declined  out  of  deference  to  his  friendship  for 
Sumner,  then  Dr.  Howe  was  appointed  and  accepted.  Sumner 
predicted  that,  feeling  under  obligation  to  the  President,  they 
would  only  report  favorably  to  his  views.  It  is  interesting  to 
remember,  in  this  connection,  the  names  of  those  who  were  so 
prompt  to  quarrel  with  Sumner  for  assailing  the  President,  as 
they  called  it,  in  his  speech  on  this  resolution.  Their  names 
will  all  soon  appear  again.  Whether  they  were  real  friends  of 
the  President  or  were  simply  actuated  by  motives  of  self-interest 
and  a  desire  for  patronage,  the  reader  must  judge.  The  lan 
guage  of  Sumner,  which  they  complained  of,  has  been  given  and 
also  his  prompt  disavowal,  on  the  same  day,  of  any  intention  to 
assail  the  President.  Doubtless  they  were  just  as  prompt  in 
communicating  to  the  President  the  vindication  they  had  given 
him.  The  President  was  displeased. 

Sumner,  however,  still  kept  his  attention  fixed  on  annexa 
tion.  He  pressed  his  resolution,  calling  for  information,  re 
ports  and  copies  of  instructions,  to  a  vote;  and  on  January 
ninth,  1871,  it  was  taken  up  and  passed.  On  February  15, 
another  resolution,  calling  for  additional  information,  was  also 
passed. 

The  hard  work,  the  excitement  and  worry  of  this  contest 
with  the  Administration,  the  manifestations  of  displeasure  he 
received,  accompanied  by  threats  of  removal  from  his  place  as 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  were  too 
much  for  his  strength.  A  cold  attended  with  some  throat  and 
lung  trouble,  from  which  he  had  suffered  from  the  beginning 
of  the  winter,  had  depleted  his  system.  To  a  friend  he  wrote 
that  he  felt  weary  and  old  and  disheartened  at  the  course  of 
the  President.  But  he  struggled  on  with  his  duties  until  Feb 
ruary  eighteenth,  when  he  was  compelled  to  yield.  For  a  week 
he  was  unable  to  attend  the  sessions  of  the  Senate.  He  suffered 
a  return  of  his  old  trouble,  a  result  of  the  assault  by  Brooks, 
the  first  he  had  experienced  for  several  years.  It  was  an  affec 
tion  of  the  heart  and  chest,  angina  pectoris,  attended  with  sud 
den  and  severe  paroxysms  of  pain,  necessarily  dangerous.  It 
was  the  same  trouble  that,  a  few  years  later,  caused  his  death. 
The  illness  was  severe  and  caused  anxiety  to  his  friends  and 
drew  from  many  ef  them  expressions  of  sympathy. 

A  new  Congress  met  on  the  fourth  day  of  March,  1871.  One 
of  the  first  duties  of  the  Senate  was  the  assignment  of  the  Sen 
ators  to  places  on  the  Committees.  The  Eepublican  members 
being  in  the  majority  these  places  were  disposed  of  in  a  caucus 
of  that  party.  The  slate  being  there  fixed,  was  easily  carried, 
at  the  meeting  of  the  Senate,  by  the  vote  of  the  Eepublican 


664  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

members.  As  the  prominence  and  usefulness  of  a  Senator  de 
pended  very  much  on  the  place  he  occupied  on  the  Committees, 
there  was  naturally  rivalry  between  the  members  for  good  ap 
pointments,  the  best  places  going  to  those  of  longest  experience 
and  greatest  prominence.  Sumner  had  for  twelve  years  been 
a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  one  of  the 
most  important,  and  for  ten  of  these  years  he  had  been  its 
chairman.  This  Committee  had  assigned  to  it  the  business  of 
the  United  States  with  foreign  nations  that  came  before  the 
Senate,  such  as  treaties,  claims,  the  settlement  of  disputed 
boundaries,  the  annexation  by  purchase  or  otherwise  of  new 
territory.  Just  at  this  time  the  work  of  the  Committee  prom 
ised  to  be  of  unusual  prominence  on  account  of  the  pending 
Alabama  and  San  Domingo  troubles.  Owing  to  Sumner's  long 
experience  with  the  work  of  the  Committee,  his  familiarity  with 
international  law  and  his  extensive  foreign  travel  and  acquain 
tance,  its  duties  were  congenial  to  him  and  he  naturally  desired 
and  expected  to  be  continued  in  the  place  he  had  so  long  occu 
pied.  The  chairmanship  of  a  committee  had  certain  privileges 
with  it  which  he  valued,  the  use  of  a  committee-room,  where  he 
could  meet  people  in  the  Capitol  privately,  and  the  clerk  of 
the  committee  to  assist  him  with  correspondence  and  other 
public  business.  The  character  of  both  the  room  and  the  clerk 
depended  a  good  deal  on  the  prominence  of  the  committee. 

In  the  Republican  caucus  called  to  make  the  assignments  for 
the  committees,  Sherman  of  Ohio,  Morrill  of  Vermont,  Howe 
of  Wisconsin,  Nye  of  Nevada  and  Pool  of  North  Carolina  were 
appointed  to  draft  a  list.  Of  these,  the  two  oldest  and  ablest 
Senators,  Sherman  and  Morrill,  were  for  the  retention  of  Sum 
ner  in  his  place,  to  which  he  was  entitled  according  to  usage 
of  the  Senate,  which  did  not  make  changes  except  for  cause. 
But  the  other  three  led  by  Howe  were  in  favor  of  a  change, 
giving  Sumner's  place  to  Cameron  of  Pennsylvania.  The  chair 
man  of  the  caucus,  Anthony  of  Rhode  Island  was  for  the  reten 
tion  of  Sumner  and  expected  that  the  Members  appointed  to 
draft  the  list,  would  so  arrange  it,  but  he  was  disappointed 
in  Howe.  Cameron  while  entitled  to  the  place  by  seniority  of 
service  on  the  Committee,  if  a  vacancy  was  created,  had  little  of 
desire  or  fitness  for  it.  But  he  was  on  intimate  terms  with  the 
President.  It  was  proposed  to  place  Sumner  at  the  head  of  a 
Committee  on  Privileges  and  Elections,  a  much  less  important 
committee,  in  fact  created  for  the  exigency  and  for  whose  duties 
Sumner  had  little  qualification  and  still  less  taste. 

When  the  list  was  read  in  the  caucus,  as  thus  reported,  Sum 
ner  was  not  altogether  taken  by  surprise,  for  his  removal  had 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  665 

been  threatened  by  Administration  Senators  and  predicted  by 
others,  for  three  months,  as  the  result  of  his  opposition  to  an 
nexation.  But  he  did  not  expect  it.  He  spoke  briefly.  A  flood 
of  memories  seemed  to  crowd  upon  him,  as  he  felt  himself 
parted  from  his  old  place  where,  during  the  long  years,  he 
had  stood  with  so  much  pride.  He  saw  the  work  well  done, 
many  of  the  difficult  questions  of  the  Rebellion  settled,  war 
with  England  and  France  narrowly  averted,  the  purchase  of 
Alaska  accomplished,,  the  Johnson-Clarendon  treaty  rejected, 
the  Alabama  claims  still  unsettled,  on  which  he  had  spent  in 
finite  labor  and  rendered  such  signal  assistance  to  the  State 
Department,  and  to  his  country,  in  moulding  public  opinion  at 
home  and  abroad.  And  he  saw,  instead  of  this  place,  a  chair 
manship  of  a  committee  on  privileges  and  elections  offered  to 
him,  to  whom  the  only  politics  known,  was  an  honest,  laborious 
and  brilliant  discharge  of  his  duties,  so  that  he  never  needed 
tricks  and  questionable  combinations,  but  carried  his  own  elec 
tions  by  great  waves  of  popular  approval.  Was  the  alternative 
offered,  intended  to  insult  and  injure  him?  Gathering  his 
robes  of  honor  about  him,  he  called  the  dead,  Lincoln,  his 
martyred  friend  with  whose  inauguration  the  place  had  come  to 
him,  Douglas,  Collamer,  Fessenden,  all  gone,  his  "  associates, 
able  and  eminent  Senators,"  "  to  testify  if  he  had  ever  failed 
in  any  duty,  of  any  labor  or  patriotism."  He  declined  the 
proffered  place  and  left  the  caucus.  From  that  day,  to  the  day 
of  his  death,  Senator  Sumner  had  no  prominence  in  the  Senate 
or  before  the  country  as  chairman  of  any  committee,  nor  even 
a  place  on  any  committee;  he  had  no  committee-room,  as  a 
convenience,  and  no  clerk  of  a  committee  as  a  needed  help, 
in  the  discharge  of  his  public  duties. 

Mr.  Elaine  for  long  years  a  Member  of  Congress,  for  a  time 
its  Speaker,  a  Senator,  a  Secretary  of  State,  later  a  candidate 
for  President  and  the  leader  of  the  Republican  party,  speaking 
of  this  act  twelve  years  later,  when  he  knew  its  unpopularity 
with  the  American  people  of  all  parties,  said :  "  The  opening 
of  the  forty-second  Congress,  on  the  fourth  of  March,  1871, 
was  disfigured  by  an  act  of  grave  injustice  committed  by  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States.  Charles  Sumner  was  deposed  from 
the  chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, — 
a  position  he  had  held  continuously  since  the  Republican  party 
gained  control  of  the  Senate.  The  cause  of  his  displacement 
may  be  found  in  the  angry  contentions,  to  which  the  scheme  of 
annexing  San  Domingo  gave  rise.  Mr.  Sumner's  opposition  to 
that  project  was  intense,  and  his  words  carried  with  them  what 
was  construed  as  a  personal  affront  to  the  President  of  the 


666  LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER 

United  States, — though  never  so  intended  by  the  Massachusetts 
Senator.  *  *  :;  Never  was  the  power  of  the  caucus  more 
wrongfully  applied.  *  *  *  For  his  fidelity  to  principle  and 
his  boldness  in  asserting  the  truth  at  an  earlier  day,  Mr.  Sum- 
ner  was  struck  down  in  the  Senate  Chamber,  by  a  weapon  in 
the  hands  of  a  political  foe.  It  was  impossible  to  anticipate  that 
fifteen  years  later,  he  would  be,  even  more  cruelly,  struck  down 
in  the  Senate  by  the  members  of  the  party  he  had  done  so  much 
to  establish.  The  cruelty  was  greater  in  the  latter  case  as 
anguish  of  spirit  is  greater  than  suffering  of  body.  In  both 
instances  Mr.  Sumner's  bearing  was  distinguished  by  dignity 
and  magnanimity.  He  gave  utterance  to  no  complaints,  arid 
silently  submitted  to  the  unjustifiable  wrong  of  which  he  was 
the  victim." 

If  it  were  intended  to  add  indignity  to  the  wrong,  a  better 
time  could  not  have  been  chosen.  The  Joint  High  Commission, 
for  the  settlement  of  the  matters  in  difference  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain,  had  just  entered  upon  the 
consideration  of  the  Alabama  claims  in  the  City  of  Washington. 
Sumner  had  first  aroused  Great  Britain  to  a  sense  of  her  danger 
and  liability  on  account  of  these  claims,  when,  as  chairman  of 
this  committee,  presenting  an  adverse  report  on  the  Johnson- 
Clarendon  treaty,  by  a  speech  making  a  powerful  presentation 
of  our  case,  he  foreshadowed  its  prompt  rejection  by  the  Senate. 
He  had  made  a  careful  study  of  the  case  and  confessedly  un 
derstood  it  better  than  any  man  in  Washington.  His  speeches 
upon  it  had  been  carefully  read  and  studied  by  Englishmen. 
And  now  he,  who  was  expected  to  take  a  prominent  part  in 
the  settlement  of  it,  who  had  a  wider  acquaintance  in  Europe 
than  any  man  in  the  Senate,  whom  the  Commissioners  from 
Great  Britain  all  knew  by  his  reputation  abroad,  was  removed 
from  his  official  position  in  the  settlement  of  it  and  discredited. 
They  were  given  notice,  that,  so  far  as  the  Administration  could 
control  the  situation,  he  was  to  have  nothing  farther  to  do 
with  it.  It  must  have  wounded  him  deeply  to  reflect  that  these 
Commissioners,  two  of  whom  had  brought  letters  to  him  from 
foreign  friends  and  one  other,  whom  he  knew  by  kindred 
studies,  were  witnesses  of  his  humiliation.  What  news  of  it 
would  they  carry  back  to  their  homes  and  to  his  friends  and  to 
those,  who,  for  his  speeches  on  these  claims,  had  turned  from 
him  as  "  an  enemy  of  England "  and  were  "  grievously  dis 
appointed  "  and  for  the  first  time  were  "  silent  when  he  was 
spoken  about  ?  " 

The  action  of  the  caucus  committee  in  displacing  him  was 
not  to  go  unquestioned.  Schurz,  sitting  near  Sumner  at  the 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  667 

time,  demanded  to  know  the  reason  for  the  change.  Howe, 
who  had  read  the  assignments,  answered  that  the  personal  re 
lations  of  the  Senator  to  the  President  and  his  Secretary  of 
State,  were  such  as  to  preclude  all  social  intercourse  between 
them.  Schurz  immediately  answered  denying  the  correctness 
of  this  statement. 

A  brief  explanation  of  the  excuse,  thus  given  by  Howe 
is  necessary.  Motley,  in  his  valedictory  to  the  State  Depart 
ment  had  alluded  to  the  rumor  that  he  was  removed  from 
the  English  Mission,  on  account  of  Sumner's  opposition  to  the 
San  Domingo  treaty.  Secretary  Fish  had  written  a  letter, 
signed  by  himself  and  afterwards  laid  before  the  Senate,  in 
which,  after  denying  that  this  was  the  cause  for  Motley's  re 
call,  he  then  went  entirely  out  of  his  way  to  vilify  Sumner, 
saying : 

"  Mr.  Motley  must  know,  or  if  he  does  not  know  it,  he  stands 
alone  in  his  ignorance  of  the  fact,  that  many  Senators  opposed 
the  San  Domingo  treaty,  openly,  generously  and  with  as  much 
efficiency  as  did  the  distinguished  Senator  to  whom  he  refers 
and  have  nevertheless  continued  to  enjoy  the  undiminished 
confidence  and  the  friendship  of  the  President, — than  whom 
no  man  living  is  more  tolerant  of  honest  and  manly  differences 
of  opinion,  is  more  single  or  sincere  in  his  desire  for  the  public 
welfare,  is  more  disinterested  or  regardless  of  what  concerns 
himself,  is  more  frank  and  confiding  in  his  own  dealings,  is 
more  sensitive  to  a  betrayal  of  confidence  or  would  look  with 
more  scorn  and  contempt  upon  one  who  uses  the  words  and  the 
assurances  of  friendship  to  cover  a  secret  and  determined  pur 
pose  of  hostility/' 

This  letter  was  dated  December  thirtieth,  1870,  and  was 
laid  before  the  Senate,  and  thus  became  a  public  document,  in 
January,  1871.  The  passage  quoted  is  a  direct,  unprovoked 
and  insulting  reference  to  Sumner.  It  contains  a  covered 
charge  that  his  opposition  to  the  San  Domingo  treaty  was 
not  open  and  generous  and  that  he  had  hypocritically  used  the 
words  and  assurances  of  friendship  to  cover  a  secret  and  de 
termined  purpose  of  hostility  toward  the  President,  whose 
confidence  he  had  betrayed.  It  was  written  and  signed  by 
Secretary  Fish  who  had  entered  the  Senate  about  the  same 
time  Sumner  did,  with  whom  from  that  day  he  had  sustained 
intimate  relations  of  friendship,  visiting  him  in  his  home  in 
Washington,  in  New  York  and  at  his  country  seat  on  the 
Hudson,  who  had  been  entertained  by  Sumner  at  his  home  in 
Washington,  and  who  had  recently  been  welcomed,  with  un 
concealed  satisfaction  to  the  State  Department  and  who  had 


668  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

already  received,  at  his  own  request,  much  assistance  in  the 
work  of  that  office  from  Surnner.  It  was  written  of  Sumner, 
who  by  a  long,  uninterrupted  and  able  career  in  one  of  the  high 
est  National  offices,  had  already  become  one  of  the  historical 
characters  of  his  generation,  whose  whole  life  had  been  above 
every  suspicion  of  dishonesty  and  peculiarly  wanting  in  every 
imputation  of  indirection,  hypocrisy  or  malice.  It  was  written 
under  such  circumstances  that  it  became  and  will  always  re 
main  one  of  the  public  records  of  the  country,  Executive  Docu 
ments  41  Cong.  3  Sess.  Senate  p.  36.  It  was  so  unexpected  to 
Sumner  that,  between  its  date  and  its  publication  he  had  on  one 
occasion  dined  and  on  another  called  at  Fish's  house.  Sumner 
did  not  know  of  its  existence  until  his  attention  was  called 
to  it  by  others. 

For  a  time  Sumner  said  nothing,  hoping  the  Secretary  would 
make  some  friendly  explanation  or  apology  for  the  wrong  done 
him.  Receiving  none  he  felt,  upon  farther  reflection,  that  he 
could  not  longer  continue  their  former  friendship.  Fish  evi 
dently  anticipated  such  a  result,  for  shortly  after  the  letter  be 
came  public,  wishing  to  advise  with  Sumner  about  a  resump 
tion  of  negotiations  with  England  over  the  Alabama  claims,  in 
stead  of  going  directly  to  Sumner,  as  their  previous  relations 
would  suggest,  he  sent  Senator  Patterson  to  Sumner  to  see  how 
he  would  receive  him.  Sumner  replied  that  should  the  Secre 
tary  come  to  his  house  he  would  be  at  his  service  for  consulta 
tion  on  public  business,  but  that  he  could  not  conceal  his  sense 
of  personal  wrong  received  from  him  without  reason  or  excuse. 
The  Secretary  came  and  there  was  a  free  and  full  conference 
about  the  public  business,  but  no  mention  of  private  matters. 
Two  days  later  at  a  dinner  given  by  Mr.  Schenck,  the  successor 
of  Motley,  Sumner  did  not  recognize  Fish  socially. 

At  this  time  there  had  been  no  break  with  the  President. 
He  was  probably,  as  rumor  said,  displeased  with  Sumner's 
opposition  to  the  treaty.  But  Sumner  intended  no  break  and 
recognized  none. 

From  this  brief  statement  of  the  facts,  it  will  be  seen  that 
there  was  nothing  in  the  relations  of  Sumner,  to  either  the 
President  or  his  Secretary,  to  in  any  way  affect  his  discharge 
of  the  duties  of  Chairman  of  the  Committee.  When  this  reason 
was  given  by  Howe,  Schurz  promptly  answered  for  Sumner, 
that  he  had  not  refused  to  enter  into  any  official  relation  with 
either.  So  that  this  must  have  been  merely  a  pretext.  Wilson 
and  Schurz  both  insisted  that  the  real  reason  was  Sumner's 
opposition  to  annexation  and  because  he  had  differed  from 
the  President  and  Secretary  on  that  question  and  they  argued 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  669 

that  a  Senator  had  a  right  to  differ  from  a  President,  a  Sec 
retary  or  any  other  officer,  that  Senators  were  nobody's  ser 
vants,  and  Wilson  added :  "  I  love  justice  and  fair  play,  and 
I  think  I  know  enough  of  the  American  people  to  know  that 
ninety-nine  hundredths  of  the  men  who  elected  this  adminis 
tration  in  1868  will  disapprove  this  act."  Trumbull,  Logan 
and  Tipton  also  spoke  earnestly  in  the  caucus  against  the 
change.  Howe  and  Nye  while  supporting  it  agreed,  and  no 
one  else  claimed  otherwise,  that  Sumner  had  always  discharged 
the  duties  of  the  place  ably,  and  that  it  was  not  intended  to 
charge  him  with  unfaithfulness  in  the  past.  Such  men  as 
the  two  Morrills,  Ferry,  Wilson,  Fenton,  Sherman,  Windom, 
Logan,  Trumbull  and  Schurz  voted  against  the  change.  But 
Conkling,  Carpenter,  Chandler,  Edmunds  and  the  Southern 
Senators  were  its  active  supporters.  Of  the  Senators  from  the 
States  lately  in  rebellion,  of  the  carpet-bag  class,  who  came  in 
with  the  years  immediately  following  the  grant  of  a  vote  to  the 
colored  people,  ten  were  for  the  change  and  only  three  against 
it, — a  difference  sufficient  to  change  the  result.  On  the  motion 
to  recommit  the  list  to  the  committee,  with  instructions  to 
report  a  list  with  Sumner  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations  the  vote  was  twenty-one  for  it  and  twenty- 
six  against  it. 

The  next  day  another  caucus  was  held  and  a  motion  to  recon 
sider  the  question  of  recommitment  was  made  and  debated,  but 
it  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  twenty-one  to  twenty-three, — a  gain  of 
three.  When  the  list,  as  reported,  was  moved  in  the  Senate, 
Schurz  made  a  motion  to  postpone  the  question,  hoping  that 
time  and  reflection  would  prevent  the  wrong.  Another  debate 
followed.  Schurz  shamed  the  opposition  for  subservience  to 
the  President  and  justified  Sumner  for  resenting  the  insult  con 
tained  in  Fish's  letter.  Wilson  attributed  the  whole  movement 
to  Sumner's  opposition  to  annexation,  and  demanded  to  know 
why  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  should  be  influenced  by  the 
feeling  of  the  President  or  Secretary  for  any  such  cause. 
Logan  characterized  it  as  "  a  surrender  of  the  independence  of 
the  Senate."  Sherman  declared  it  "  unjustifiable,  impolitic  and 
unnecessary."  Trumbull  said  he  had  stood  by  Sumner  "  when 
he  was  stricken  down  by  slavery  and  he  stood  by  him  now  when 
stricken  down,  by  the  party  he  had  done  as  much  to  create  as 
any  living  man."  The  Democrats  opposed  the  change.  Bayard 
suggested  that  the  name  of  the  committee  should  be  changed 
from  committee  on  Foreign  Relations  to  Committee  on  Personal 
Relations.  But  this  motion  to  postpone  was  also  lost,  as  well  as 
a  motion  to  adjourn.  The  decree  had  gone  forth  for  Sumner's 


670  LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER 

removal  and  it  was  to  be  obeyed.  The  motion  to  adopt  the  re 
port  of  the  committee  was  carried,  the  Republicans,  feeling  the 
obligation  of  the  action  of  the  caucus,  either  voting  for  it  or 
refraining  from  voting  at  all.  But,  as  if  nothing  should  be 
wanting  to  complete  the  unusual  character  of  the  scene,  the 
Democratic  members  of  the  Senate  all  recorded  their  votes 
against  this  unjust  action. 

Sumner  took  no  part  in  any  of  the  proceedings.  There  had 
been  no  suggestion,  that  in  the  past  he  had  been  wanting  in  the 
discharge  of  any  duty  as  chairman  of  the  Committee.  On  the 
contrary  his  enemies  admitted  that,  with  his  relations  to  the 
President  and  his  Secretary  different,  he  would  fill  the  place 
better  than  any  other  Senator.  With  this  record,  he  felt  he 
could  afford  to  be  silent.  When  Fish  volunteered  to  make  the 
unprovoked  assault  on  him  that  was  made,  in  the  letter  already 
quoted,  Sumner  prepared  a  statement  of  his  personal  relations 
with  the  President  and  his  Secretary,  intending  at  first  to  make 
it  the  basis  of  a  speech  in  the  Senate,  but  upon  farther  reflection 
and  consultation  with  friends  decided  to  make  no  reply  even 
to  this  letter.  The  statement  was,  however,  put  in  print  and  a 
few  copies  of  it  placed  in  the  hands  of  personal  friends,  marked, 
"  Unpublished, — private  and  confidential, — not  to  go  out  of 
Mr. — 's  hands."  He  was  repeatedly  pressed  afterwards  to  pub 
lish  it,  but  his  answer  was  that  he  would  not  do  it,  for  personal 
vindication  merely,  and  that  as  to  Mr.  Motley  he  thought  the 
matter  stood  well  enough  before  the  public.  After  his  death, 
however,  a  friend  to  whom  one  of  the  copies  had  been  intrusted, 
believing  that  justice  to  his  memory  required  its  publication, 
gave  it  to  the  press.  It  has  since  been  included  in  the  collected 
edition  of  Simmer's  Works. 

The  removal  was  unpopular,  because  it  degraded  a  man  emi 
nent  in  the  public  service  and  of  deservedly  high  standing ;  and 
it  also  established  a  dangerous  precedent.  If  the  President,  by 
the  possession  of  the  public  patronage,  could  enter  the  Senate 
and  remove  a  Senator  from  his  place  on  one  of  the  most  im 
portant  Committees,  for  a  mere  refusal  to  vote  for  and  sustain 
a  favorite  measure  of  the  Executive,  then  Senatorial  indepen 
dence  was  at  an  end  and  the  usefulness  of  one  department  of  the 
government  was  seriously  crippled.  No  other  cause  for  the 
removal  ever  existed.  But  to  the  public  this  was  manifestly 
insufficient  and  others  were  trumped  up  that  were  not  thought 
of  or  mentioned  at  the  time.  They  originated,  several  years  af 
ter  Sumner's  death,  with  Secretary  Fish  and  his  assistant  J.  C. 
B.  Davis,  each  probably  impelled  by  a  desire  to  improve  his 
own  record.  They  were  in  substance  that  Sumner  did  not,  as 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  671 

chairman,,  promptly  report  or  move  forward  treaties  referred  to 
his  Committee  and  that  he  was  expected  to  be  an  obstacle  to  the 
negotiations  with  Great  Britain  over  the  Alabama  claims.  An 
investigation  showed  they  were  without  foundation.  If  treaties 
were  not  reported  or  pushed  forward,  complaints  would  have 
been  made.  This  was  a  matter  that  other  Senators  and  other 
members  of  the  Committee  could  complain  of  and  correct.  But 
there  was  no  such  complaint  against  him.  His  associates,  when 
appealed  to  since,  have  declared  there  was  no  ground  for  such 
a  complaint.  And  the  express  disclaimer  of  any  dissatisfaction 
with  his  past  conduct  of  the  work  of  the  chairman,  made  by 
those  who  sought  his  removal,  in  the  debates  over  it,  should  have 
prevented  such  a  claim  being  made  after  his  death.  Farther 
answer  need  hardly  be  made  to  the  assertion  that  Sumner  was 
expected  to  be  an  obstruction  to  the  negotiations  with  Great 
Britain,  than  to  recall  the  reader's  attention  to  the  use  that  had 
nlreacry  been  made,  by  the  Secretary,  of  Simmer's  superior  quali 
fication  for  that  work.  If  the  suggestion  had  been  made  by 
him,  with  others,  that  a  cession  of  Canada  might  be  one  of  the 
results  of  the  negotiations,  it  should  be  remembered  also,  that 
he  had  always  insisted  that  this  possession  must  never  come  to 
us,  except  by  peaceable  agreement,  and  with  the  consent  of  her 
people.  And  if  mere  expectations  are  to  control  in  estimating 
a  man's  qualifications  for  a  position,  the  most  fanciful  reasons, 
that  the  wildest  imagination  could  devise,  might  be  urged 
against  any  man's  selection. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  what  became  of  the  leaders  of  this 
movement  in  the  Senate  and  how  much  it  profited  them.  Howe, 
Nye  and  Pool,  the  three  members  of  the  committee  of  the  caucus 
who  voted  for  the  report,  as  well  as  Carpenter  who  spoke  long 
est  in  its  favor,  all  failed  of  re-election.  Conkling  another  of  its 
prime-movers,  and  who  also  spoke  for  it,  received  one  re-election, 
only  to  quarrel,  with  both  of  Grant's  successors,  in  the  Presi 
dency,  Hayes,  and  Garfield,  about  patronage.  He  finally  in  a 
pique  over  the  appointment  of  a  collector  for  the  port  of  New 
York,  resigned  his  office,  and  asked  a  re-election,  was  refused, 
and  then  disappeared  forever  from  the  field  of  politics.  Ed 
munds,  coming  from  a  state,  remarkable  for  the  length  of 
service  extended  to  her  Senators,  continued  on  the  stage  some 
years  longer,  always  disappointed  in  his  ambition  for  promo 
tion,  and  then  retired.  From  this  list  the  inference  would  be, 
that,  even  in  high  places,  it  is  best  always  to  do  what  is  right. 
The  Executive  favor,  if  they  acquired  any  by  this  act,  did  none 
of  these  men  any  permanent  good. 

It  still  remains  to  be  told  what  became  of  the  other  part  of 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

this  controversy,,  the  scheme  for  annexing  San  Domingo. 
This  can  be  done  in  a  few  words.  The  resolutions  introduced  by 
Sumner  and  passed  by  the  Senate,  calling  for  documents  in  the 
State  and  Navy  Departments,  relative  to  annexation,  resulted 
in  making  public  a  good  deal  of  information  about  the  employ 
ment  of  the  Navy  in  the  waters  of  the  island  pending  the  negoti 
ations.  On  the  twenty-fourth  of  March,  1871,  Sumner  offered 
in  the  Senate,  a  series  of  resolutions,  calling  for  the  withdrawal 
of  the  Navy  and  condemning  its  use,  to  maintain  Baez  in  power, 
while  the  negotiations  for  the  sale  of  his  country  were  pending, 
as  in  violation  of  the  rights  of  the  people  of  the  island,  of  our 
constitution,  and  of  the  principles  of  international  law.  They 
disavowed  the  indignities  already  shown  the  Eepublic  of  Haiti. 
In  support  of  these  resolutions,  he  spoke  at  length,  in  the  Sen 
ate,  three  days  later.  It  was  sought  by  Conkling  to  prevent  any 
farther  discussion  of  the  question,  but  Sumner  under  a  ruling 
of  the  Vice-President  overcame  the  obstruction  and  obtained  the 
floor.  The  news  of  his  intention  to  speak  had  gone  out  and  a 
crowd,  estimated  at  two  thousand  people,  was  present  to  hear 
him.  It  was  expected,  after  the  provocation  he  had  received  and 
his  well-known  interest  in  the  subject,  that  he  would  show  some 
severity  towards  the  Administration.  In  this,  however,  they 
were  disappointed.  He  confined  himself  to  a  discussion  of  the 
facts  as  shown  by  the  dispatches,  naval  orders  and  reports  which 
were  now  printed  and  made  public.  It  was  a  carefully  prepared 
argument  to  show  that  the  President,  in  sending  the  ships  to 
Dominican  waters  to  intimidate  the  people  in  both  parts  of  the 
island,  had  exceeded  his  authority.  He  criticised  the  President 
for  coming  to  the  Capitol,  in  his  zeal  for  annexation,  to  im 
portune  Senators  to  vote  for  the  treaty;  and  for  assembling 
them  at  the  White  House  for  the  same  purpose.  "Who  can 
measure/5  he  asked,  "  the  pressure  of  all  kinds  by  himself  or 
agents,  especially  through  the  appointing  power,  all  to  secure 
the  consummation  of  this  scheme  ?  " 

Once  he  drew  the  temper  of  his  audience,  when  he  declared, 
that  if  the  President  had  bestowed  one-fourth  of  the  time, 
money,  zeal,  will,  personal  attention,  personal  effort  and  per 
sonal  intercession,  which  he  had  bestowed  on  his  attempt  to 
obtain  half  an  island  in  the  Carribean  Sea,  our  Southern  Ku- 
Klux  would  have  existed  in  name  only,  while  tranquillity  would 
have  reigned  everywhere  within  our  borders.  Whereupon  the 
audience  burst  into  applause  and  the  Vice-President  was  com 
pelled  to  threaten  to  clear  the  galleries  to  restore  order. 

The  Commissioners,  Wade,  White  and  Howe,  appointed  by 
the  President  under  the  previous  joint  resolution  of  the  Senate 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  673 

and  House,  to  visit  the  island,  were  conveyed  there,  in  a  United 
States  war-ship,  there  being  several  newspaper  men  in  their 
party.  They  remained  on  the  island,  making  observations  and 
gathering  information,  from  January  twenty-third  to  February 
twenty-eighth,  1871.  As  Simmer  predicted  they  made  a  re 
port  friendly  to  the  President,  but  much  milder  than  the  views 
he  had  expressed.  They  agreed  that  the  island  could  furnish 
sugar,  coffee  and  other  tropical  products  needed  for  our  con 
sumption  and  that  the  example  of  the  free  labor  there  would 
tend  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  other  West  India  Islands. 

The  report  was  communicated  to  Congress,  by  the  President. 
In  the  accompanying  message,  he  became  personal.  He  said 
the  mere  rejection  of  a  treaty  only  indicated  a  difference  of 
opinion  between  the  Senate  and  President ;  but  when  the  rejec 
tion  was  accompanied  with  "  charges  openly  made  of  corrup 
tion  on  the  part  of  the  President  or  those  employed  by  him, 
the  case  was  different.  Indeed,  in  such  case  the  honor  of  the 
nation  demanded  investigation  ".  He  also  referred  to  the  "  ac 
rimonious  debates  in  Congress  "  and  "  unjust  aspersions  else 
where  "  and  added,  that  "  no  one  could  perform  the  duties  of 
President,  without  sometimes  incurring  the  hostility  of  those, 
who  deemed  their  opinions  and  wishes  treated  with  insufficient 
consideration"  and  added  that  if  the  President  had  the  ap 
proval  of  his  own  conscience,  he  could  "  bear  with  patience  the 
censure  of  disappointed  men  ".  These  were  all  well  understood 
at  the  time  to  be  references  to  Sumner.  They  show  the  feeling 
of  the  President  towards  him  and  the  treatment  he  could  be 
prepared  to  expect  from  his  Administration.  But  they  were 
unfair.  Sumner  had  not  charged  the  President  with  corrup 
tion.  He  had  never  questioned  the  integrity  of  the  President's 
motives.  But  he  believed  he  was  not  well  informed  of  the 
physical  or  political  conditions  in  the  island,  that  he  was  not 
properly  advised  in  these  duties  of  his  office  and  that  he  was 
being  imposed  on  by  political  adventurers  at  home  and  abroad. 
He  was  determined,  without  counting  nicely  the  cost  to  him 
self,  to  prevent  the  consummation  of  the  scheme ;  and  he  did. 

The  President  having  at  the  hands  of  the  Commission  re 
ceived  such  vindication  as  their  report  furnished,  declared  that 
his  connection  with  the  subject  and  all  his  solicitude  for  it  was 
ended.  Indeed,  he  could  hardly  do  otherwise,  for  it  was  now 
apparent  that  neither  the  Senate  nor  the  House  could  be  in 
duced  to  join  him  in  it. 


CHAPTER   XLI 

GRATITUDE  OF   HAITI THE   CIVIL   RIGHTS   BILL SALE  OF  ARMS 

TO      FRANCE LIBERAL     REPUBLICAN      MOVEMENT SPEECH 

AGAINST  GRANT SUMNER  AGAINST  HIS  RE-ELECTION 

THE  annexation  of  San  Domingo  was  regarded  by  the  Hai 
tians  as  threatening  the  independence  of  their  Republic  and 
they  showed  in  several  ways  their  appreciation  of  Simmer's 
efforts  to  defeat  it.  On  July  thirteenth,  1871,  the  Haitian 
Minister  at  Washington  placed  in  his  hands  a  medal  from  the 
President  and  other  distinguished  citizens  of  the  Republic, 
accompanied  by  a  letter  in  which  they  said  that  "  by  his 
eloquence  and  his  high  morality,  he  had  made  free  four  millions 
of  blacks  in  the  United  States  ",  but  insisted  that  great  as  this 
work  was,  it  was  still  more  to  have  protected  and  defended  the 
independence  of  Haiti  on  two  solemn  occasions  and  to  have 
thus  affirmed  the  aptitude  of  the  black  race  for  civilization  and 
self-government.  In  replying  to  the  letter  Sumner  said  that 
self-government  implied  self-respect  and  that  in  clinging  to 
national  life  not  only  for  the  sake  of  their  own  Republic  but 
as  an  example  to  their  race  there  would,  if  successfully  accom 
plished,  be  a  triumph  for  the  black  man  everywhere,  marking 
an  epoch  in  civilization.  He  felt  it,  however,  his  duty  to  decline 
the  medal  because  of  the  provision  in  the  Constitution  for 
bidding  any  officer  of  the  United  States  to  accept  a  present 
from  a  foreign  State.  It  was  thereupon  given  to  the  Common 
wealth  of  Massachusetts  and  was  afterwards  deposited  in  the 
State  Library  at  Boston. 

A  year  later  on  the  occasion  of  the  Haitian  Minister  going 
to  Washington  he  carried  from  the  President  of  his  Republic  a 
letter  gratefully  acknowledging  the  service  of  Sumner  to  their 
country.  Sumner  was  then  in  Europe  and  it  did  not  come  to 
his  hands  for  some  time  and  then  it  remained  unanswered  for 
several  months  longer,  owing  to  his  sickness.  In  his  reply, 
dated  on  the  anniversary  of  our  National  independence,  July 
4,  1873,  he  said  that  in  history  the  crime  against  the  African 
race  would  stand  forth  in  terrible  eminence,  always  observed 
and  never  forgotten ;  and  apparent  in  its  true  character  just  in 
proportion  as  civilization  prevails.  And  he  predicted  that  with 

674 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  675 

increasing  light  the  denial  of  equal  rights,  on  account  of  color, 
would  not  escape  the  judgment  that  had  already  been  awarded 
to  slavery  itself.  The  same  year  the  Kepublic,  in  recognition 
of  his  services,  ordered  a  full  length  oil  portrait  of  him,  the 
last  likeness  painted  from  life.  It  represents  him  speaking 
in  the  Senate  and  is  considered  one  of  the  best  portraits  of  the 
Senator.  It  now  hangs  in  the  Senate  Chamber  of  the  Haitian 
Capitol  at  Port-au-Prince. 

An  incident  occurred  as  the  Commissioners  appointed  by  the 
President  were  returning  from  San  Domingo  that  attracted 
some  attention  at  the  time  and  was  afterwards  used  by  Sumner 
in  the  debates  for  equal  rights.  Frederick  Douglass,  under  the 
provisions  of  the  joint  resolution  providing  for  the  Commission, 
had  been  appointed  Secretary  to  the  Commissioners.  This  was 
the  only  salaried  officer  provided  for  in  the  resolution.  As  the 
mail  steamer  of  the  Potomac  Eiver  bearing  the  Commissioners 
on  their  journey  from  San  Domingo,  was  approaching  Wash 
ington,  Douglass  was  refused,  by  the  officers  of  the  vessel,  a 
place  at  the  supper  table,  with  the  Commissioners,  nor  was  he 
invited  to  dine  with  them  at  the  White  House  when  they  were 
entertained,  by  the  President,  three  days  later.  Douglass  was 
the  leading  colored  man  of  the  country,  one  of  the  most  eloquent 
men  of  his  generation,  and  his  exclusion  solely  on  account  of 
color,  at  a  time  when  there  was  so  much  agitation  of  the  race 
question,  could  not  fail  to  provoke  remark. 

In  May,  1870,  Sumner  introduced  a  bill  to  protect  all  per 
sons  in  their  civil  rights.  It  was  referred  to  the  Judiciary  Com 
mittee  and  was  held  by  it  till  a  few  days  before  the  close  of  the 
session  and  then  was  reported  on  adversely.  On  January  twen 
tieth,  1871  Sumner  introduced  it  again  and  with  the  same 
result.  On  the  opening  of  the  next  Congress,  March  ninth, 
1871,  Sumner  introduced  it  again  and,  remarking  that  it  had 
twice  been  adversely  reported  on,  did  not  ask  a  reference  of  it 
to  the  committee,  but  gave  notice  that  he  would  do  what  he 
could  to  press  it  to  a  vote.  Not  succeeding,  however,  at  that 
session,  he  brought  it  up  again  at  the  next  and  a  few  days  later 
he  moved  it  as  an  amendment  to  the  pending  Amnesty  Bill, 
providing  for  the  removal  of  the  disability  imposed  in  the  Four 
teenth  Amendment  upon  those  who  as  National  or  State  officers 
had  taken  an  oath  to  support  the  United  States  Constitution 
and  had  afterwards  engaged  in  the  Rebellion.  This  disabled 
them  from  holding  any  office,  State  or  National,  until  the  dis 
ability  was  removed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  each  House  of  Con 
gress.  In  the  debate  that  followed,  he  insisted  that  the  two 
should  go  "  hand  in  hand,"  that  he  "  remembered  too  well  the 


676  LIFE   OF   CHARLES,    SUMNER 

fires  over  which  we  had  walked  in  the  latter  days  not  to  know 
that  reconciliation  was  impossible  except  on  the  recognition  of 
equal  rights."  He  insisted  that  the  door  of  the  public  inn,  of 
the  theatre,  the  railroad  car,  the  school,  the  church  and  the 
cemetery  should  be  open  by  law  to  the  colored  man,  the  same  as 
to  the  white.  As  an  illustration  he  introduced  in  his  argument 
the  case  of  Frederick  Douglass,  already  mentioned.  While  he 
had  never  sought  the  punishment  of  any  one,  he  said,  he  re 
joiced  to  know  that  the  Eebellion  had  closed  without  the  sacri 
fice  of  a  single  human  life,  by  the  civil  power,  as  he  had  pre 
dicted  it  would  early  in  the  war.  'He  now  insisted  upon  this 
measure  of  justice  to  the  colored  race.  He  reminded  Senators 
"that  higher  than  any  beauty  in  art  or  literature  was  the 
beauty  in  relieving  the  poor,  in  elevating  the  down-trodden  and 
being  a  succor  to  the  oppressed,  that  there  was  true  grandeur 
in  an  example  of  justice,  making  the  rights  of  all  the  same  as 
our  own  and  beating  down  prejudice,  like  Satan  under  their 
feet." 

Although  now  broken  in  health  and  feeling  the  weight  of 
years,  never  did  the  persistency  of  Sumner  come  out  more  fully 
than  in  the  conduct  of  this  bill.  It  was  humorously  referred  to, 
during  the  debates,  by  Senator  Flanagan,  of  Texas,  "  I  am  re 
minded,"  he  said,  in  referring  to  Sumner,  "  that  it  is  best  to 
get  rid  of  the  imposing  Senator,  just  as  the  lady  answered  her 
admirer.  The  suitor  had  been  importuning  her  time  and  again 
and  she  had  invariably  declined  to  accept  the  proposition. 
At  length,  however,  being  very  much  annoyed,  she  concluded 
to  say  '  yes  ?  just  to  get  rid  of  his  importunity.  I  want  to  go 
with  the  Senator  to  get  rid  of  this  matter,  because,  really,  Mr. 
President,  we  find  his  bill  here  as  a  breakwater.  A  concurrent 
resolution  was  introduced  here  for  the  adjournment  of  Con 
gress  at  a  particular  day.  Well,  you  saw  that  bill  thrust  right 
on  it.  '  Stop  ! '  says  he,  '  you  must  not  adjourn  until  my  bill  is 
passed.'  There  it  was  again ;  here  it  is  now ;  and  we  shall  con 
tinue  to  have  it ;  and  I  am  for  making  peace  with  it  by  a  general 
surrender  at  once." 

During  one  of  the  debates  on  the  bill,  a  passage  occurred 
between  Sumner  and  Senator  Carpenter  who  was  objecting  to 
the  equality  proposed  in  the  churches.  Carpenter  insisted  Con 
gress  had  no  right  to  interfere  and  he  asked  Sumner  whether  it 
would  be  constitutional  to  enact  that  in  no  church  should  the 
Host  be  exalted  during  divine  service.  Sumner  promptly  an 
swered  that  Congress  could  not  interfere  with  any  religious 
observance,  but  that  he  was  not  proposing  to  interfere  with 
it,  that  all  he  asked  was  complete  equality  before  the  law, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  677 

in  the  inn,  on  the  highway,  in  the  school,  the  church,  the  jury 
and  in  cemeteries,  the  last  resting-place  of  the  dead.  He  in 
sisted  that  if  the  church  were  to  be  incorporated  and  protected 
by  law,  they  should  not  be  allowed  to  insult  a  fellow  human 
being  on  account  of  color. 

"  The  Senator,"  he  said,  "  steps  forward  and  says :  No  !  * 
You  listened  to  his  eloquent,  fervid  appeal.    I  felt  its  eloquence, 
but  regretted  that  such  power  was  employed  in  such  a  cause. 
I  said  that,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  he  had  copied  Petrol 
eum  Y.  Nasby's  hymn. 

'  Shel  niggers  black  this  land  possess, 

And  mix  with  us  up  here  ? 
O,  no,  my  friends;  \ve  rayther  guess 
We'll  never  stand  that  'ere.' " 

Nasby's  letters  were  favorites  with  Lincoln  and  Sumner. 
Both  recognized  the  part  they  performed  in  abolishing  slavery 
and  aiding  reconstruction.  Sumner  wrote  an  introduction 
for  a  permanent  edition  of  them,  in  which  he  said  that  coming 
periodically  and  enjoying  an  extensive  circulation,  each  letter 
was  like  a  speech  or  one  of  those  songs  which  stirred  the  people. 

A  motion  to  strike  out  the  provision  in  the  Civil  Eights  Bill 
as  to  churches  was  afterwards  carried.  Thus  amended,  Sum- 
ner's  motion  to  make  it  a  part  of  the  Amnesty  Bill  was  carried 
by  the  casting  vote  of  Vice-President  Colfax.  But  when  this 
bill,  in  the  amended  form,  came  to  a  vote  it  failed  to  receive  the 
two-thirds  vote  required  to  pass  it.  Democrats,  opposed  to  the 
Civil  Eights  provision,  voted  against  the  Amnesty  Bill  con 
taining  it.  Sumner  introduced  it  again  and  one  night  when 
the  Senate  was  holding  a  night  session  to  consider  the  Ku-Klux 
Act,  and  when  he  was  obliged  to  absent  himself  from  the  Senate 
on  account  of  sickness,  Chandler,  taking  advantage  of  his  ab 
sence,  had  it  passed  in  a  greatly  modified  and  unsatisfactory 
form,  leaving  out  the  requirement  of  equality  in  juries  and 
in  the  public  schools.  Spencer,  of  Alabama,  protested  that  it 
was  unfair  to  Sumner  to  thus  act  on  his  bill,  in  his  absence, 
and  tried  to  secure  an  adjournment,  but  failed.  A  messenger 
was  then  sent  to  Sumner's  house  for  him  and  he  arose  and 
dressed  and  hurried  to  the  Senate  to  enter  his  protest,  but  he 
was  too  late.  This  bill,  however,  failed  in  the  House.  But  the 
Amnesty  bill  with  which  Sumner  had  sought  to  associate  it  was 
was  passed.  The  next  session  Sumner  was  unable  to  attend 
the  sessions  of  the  Senate  on  account  of  sickness;  but  on  the 
first  of  December,  1873,  he  introduced  it  again,  leaving  out  the 
provision  as  to  churches,  which  had  been  voted  out  by  the 
Senate. 


678  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumner  felt  a  deep  interest  in  this  bill.  With  it  passed,  he 
said  that  he  could  retire  from  public  life  and  feel  that  his  life- 
work  for  the  equality  of  the  colored  race  was  accomplished. 
When  it  had  been  made  a  part  of  the  Amnesty  Bill  by  the  cast 
ing  vote  of  the  Vice-President  and  there  seemed  to  be  a  well- 
grounded  hope  for  its  passage,  he  wrote  Longfellow :  "  I  am 
weary,  and  often  say,  How  much  longer  must  this  last?  I 
have  been  gratified  by  the  success  of  the  Civil-Eights  Bill.  I 
begin  to  believe  it  will  become  a  law;  then  will  there  be  joy. 
Very  few  measures  of  equal  importance  have  ever  been  pre 
sented.  It  will  be  the  cap-stone  of  my  work.  Then,  perhaps,  I 
had  better  withdraw,  and  leave  to  others  this  laborious  life." 

The  bill  did  become  a  law,  after  Simmer's  death,  but  was 
subsequently  held  unconstitutional,  by  the  Supreme  Court,  on 
the  ground  that  it  was  an  invasion  of  the  rights  of  the  people 
of  the  States,  in  their  purely  domestic  relations, — a  result  that 
had  been  predicted  during  the  debates  by  Morrill  (Me.)  and 
Carpenter.  Sumner,  in  his  zeal  for  equal  rights,  sometimes 
overlooked  such  considerations.  An  illustration  of  it  was  given 
in  this  debate,  when  in  reply  to  Morrill  he  said :  "  I  insist  that 
the  National  Constitution  must  be  interpreted  by  the  National 
Declaration.  I  insist  that  the  Declaration  is  of  equal  and  co 
ordinate  authority  with  the  Constitution  itself."  This  posi 
tion,  it  need  hardly  be  added,  could  not  be  approved,  by  law 
yers  generally. 

In  1872  Sumner  moved  an  investigation  that  further  tried 
his  now  broken  health  and  strength.  The  Franco-Prussian  War 
having  commenced,  the  United  States  had  promptly  issued  a 
declaration  of  neutrality.  A  sale  of  the  large  supply  of  arms, 
accumulated  during  our  recent  war,  had  been  taking  place. 
At  the  breaking  out  of  the  European  war  and  the  declaration 
of  our  neutrality,  these  arms  were  being  sold  to  Remington  & 
Sons,  of  New  York.  They  were  discovered  to  be  agents  of 
France.  Further  sales  to  them  were  forbidden  by  the  War 
Department,  but  the  sales  were  continued  to  others,  apparently 
connected  with  the  Remingtons,  and  the  arms  were  still  going 
to  France.  Sumner  was  not  willing  to  see  the  spirit  of  neu 
trality  thus  violated  while  its  letter  was  being  upheld, — es 
pecially  while  negotiations  for  indemnity  were  in  progress  be 
tween  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  for  similar  infrac 
tions.  He  introduced  a  resolution  providing  for  a  committee  to 
investigate  all  these  sales.  An  acrimonious  debate  ensued, 
Sumner  and  Schurz  alone  speaking  for  it,  but  Conkling,  Car 
penter  and  several  others  opposing  it.  Sumner's  health  was 
not  equal  to  the  work,  and  Schurz,  at  his  request,  took  the  lead 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  679 

in  the  debates.  The  resolution  carried.  But  a  committee  was 
selected  of  those  who  had  opposed  it.  Neither  Sumner,  nor 
Schurz,  was  accorded  a  place  on  the  committee.  Sumner  filed 
two  protests  against  the  committee  as  thus  constituted  and 
refused  to  appear  before  it  to  testify.  He  placed  his  refusal  on 
the  ground  that  the  committee  was  thus  improperly  constituted 
and  on  the  further  ground  that  what  information  a  Senator 
acquired  should  be  privileged  just  as  the  information  is,  that  is 
acquired  by  a  member  of  the  grand  jury.  The  committee  did 
not  seek  to  compel  him  to  testify,  but  hushed  up  the  investiga 
tion.  The  Prussians  did  not  promote  it  or  complain  of  the 
sales,  Bismarck  significantly  remarking,  when  his  attention  was 
called  to  it,  that  it  was  cheaper  to  capture  the  arms  on  the 
Loire,  than  to  purchase  them  in  Washington.  The  investiga 
tion,  however,  such  as  it  was,  stopped  the  further  sale. 

It  was  the  tone  of  the  Administration  of  President  Grant,  as 
revealed  in  such  transactions,  that  went  far  to  create  the  want 
of  confidence  and  dissatisfaction,  that  was  felt  at  the  close  of 
his  first  term.  Sumner  had  vigorously  protested  against  it  in 
the  San  Domingo  scheme  and  had  been  made  to  feel  it,  in  his 
removal  from  his  committee  and  in  the  recall  of  Motley.  He 
was  dissatisfied  with  the  Administration  in  other  ways.  He 
was  not  alone  in  this  feeling  of  dissatisfaction.  It  was  be 
coming  widespread  among  Eepublicans.  The  question  was  fre 
quently  asked,  what  would  be  Sumner's  attitude  toward  Grant's 
renornination  ?  Except  to  his  intimate  friends,  he  maintained 
a  discreet  silence  upon  the  subject.  He  hoped  that  Grant  would 
not  be  a  candidate  and  there  was  some  foundation  for  this 
hope ;  for  those  close  to  him,  at  the  time  of  his  first  nomination, 
had  published,  apparently  by  authority,  and  certainly  without 
contradiction,  that  he  was  in  favor  of  limiting  the  President 
to  a  single  term.  But  as  time  passed  it  became  apparent  that 
this  hope  was  not  to  be  realized.  Grant's  friends  were  pressing 
his  claim  for  a  renomination.  Sumner  then  determined  to 
defeat  it  if  he  could,  though  he  appreciated  the  force  of  the 
precedent  in  favor  of  a  second  term  and  likewise  the  power 
which  the  patronage  of  the  office  gave  the  incumbent. 

Schurz  and  Trumbull,  fellow  Senators,  both  very  near 
friends,  had  already  communicated  to  Sumner  their  determina 
tion  to  oppose  Grant's  re-election.  Senator  Fenton,  of  New 
York,  was  also  dissatisfied.  For  four  years  he  had  been  the 
recognized  leader  of  the  Republican  organization  in  New  York. 
Horace  Greeley  was  his  candidate  for  the  nomination  for  Gov 
ernor,  in  1870,  but  he  was  defeated  in  the  convention  by 
Stewart  L.  Woodford,  under  the  rising  leadership  of  lioscoe 


680  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Conkling,  as  it  was  claimed  by  the  use  of  Federal  patronage. 
Greeley  was  among  the  disaffected.  And  his  paper,  the  New 
York  Tribune  as  well  as  the  Chicago  Tribune,  the  Cincinnati 
Commercial  and  the  Springfield  Republican,  four  of  the  most 
influential  of  the  hitherto  Eepublican  dailies  of  the  country, 
were  opposing  him.  The  list  of  disaffected  included  such  men 
as  David  Dudley  Field,  of  New  York,  Colonel  McClure,  of 
Pennsylvania;  Stanley  Matthews  and  George  Hoadly,  of 
Ohio;  Governor  Brown  and  Joseph  Pulitzer,  of  Missouri; 
Cassius  M.  Clay,  of  Kentucky ;  George  W.  Julian,  of  Indiana ; 
F.  W.  Bird,  a  very  near  friend  of  Sumner,  of  Massachusetts, 
and  David  A.  Wells,  of  Connecticut.  More  than  any  other, 
perhaps,  Schurz  was  entitled  to  be  called  the  guiding  spirit  of 
what  has  been  known  as  the  Liberal  Republican  movement  of 
1872. 

It  originated  in  Missouri  in  1870.  That  State  had  not  se 
ceded,  but  many  of  her  citizens  had  become  Confederates. 
These  Confederates  had  been  disfranchised  by  an  amendment 
to  the  State  Constitution  and  now  that  the  war  was  closed  they 
asked  that  this  disability  be  removed.  But  the  Legislature  was 
Republican  and  the  party  divided  upon  this  question.  Schurz 
and  Brown  headed  a  minority  that  united  with  the  Democrats 
and  removed  the  disability.  It  was  a  movement  that  had 
already  been  foreshadowed  by  Greeley,  when,  in  1868,  he  ad 
vised  the  Democrats  to  nominate  Chief  Justice  Chase,  on  a 
platform  of  amnesty  and  suffrage.  Such  a  course  he  believed 
would  go  far  to  heal  the  differences  created  by  the  war  and  be 
a  great  aid  to  reconstruction,  even  though  it  did  not  succeed. 
This  advice  had  made  a  deep  impression  at  the  time  and  with 
the  growing  dissatisfaction  over  President  Grant's  course,  it 
had  gathered  strength  in  the  intervening  years. 

The  Liberal  State  Convention  of  Missouri  issued  a  call  for  a 
National  Convention  to  be  held  at  Cincinnati  on  May  first, 
1872.  As  the  party  had  no  organization  elsewhere,  it  neces 
sarily  partook  of  the  character  of  a  mass  convention.  Every 
body  went  who  would  and  to  equalize  the  representation,  those 
present  selected  the  delegates  from  their  number  to  represent 
their  respective  States.  Stanley  Matthews  was  made  tem 
porary  and  Carl  Schurz  was  the  permanent  chairman.  Both, 
in  their  speeches  on  taking  the  chair,  emphasized  the  personal 
and  military  character  of  the  Administration  of  President 
Grant.  Each  protested  that  they  were  still  Republicans  and 
that  it  was  only  the  perversion  of  the  office  to  the  personal  pur 
poses  of  the  President  and  of  a  few  of  his  favored  lieutenants, 
in  controlling  States,  that  led  them  to  take  this  step.  Charles 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  681 

Francis  Adams,  of  Massachusetts,  Horace  Greeley,  of  New 
York  and  Lyman  Trumbull,  of  Illinois,  were  the  leading 
candidates  for  President,  and,  on  the  sixth  ballot,  Greeley  was 
nominated.  B.  Gratz  Brown,  of  Missouri,  was  nominated  for 
Vice-President. 

Sumner  did  not  attend  the  convention  and  had  not  com 
mitted  himself  to  the  movement.  He  was  very  loath  to  leave 
the  Republican  party.  Around  it  gathered  the  political  asso 
ciations  of  a  long  public-  career,  now,  as  the  condition  of  his 
health  warned  him,  drawing  to  a  close.  For  many  weeks  he  had 
been  the  target  for  rival  influences.  On  the  one  side  were  many 
party  associates,  in  public  life,  who  knew  the  value  and  the 
extent  of  his  public  labors,  the  worth  to  the  party  of  that  high 
moral  character,  for  which  he  was  widely  known — such  men  as 
his  colleague  in  the  Senate,  Henry  Wilson,  who  had  done  what 
he  could  to  avert  the  wrong  Grant  had  done  him  and  had  been 
constant  in  his  endeavors  to  heal  the  breach  thus  created. 
They  were  anxious  to  retain  Sumner  in  the  party,  and  preserve 
harmony.  On  the  other  side  was  the  peculiar  private  following 
of  friends  of  a  lifetime — such  as  F.  W.  Bird,  who  held  no 
public  station,  sought  in  politics  only  the  good  of  his  fellow- 
men  and,  who  was  leaving  the  party  because  of  the  injury  done 
Sumner  and  the  degradation,  as  he  thought,  of  the  public 
service  under  Grant.  They  urged  him  to  go  along  with  them. 

Some  weeks  before  the  convention,  it  was  given  out,  that  he 
would  be  present  and  preside  over  its  deliberations  and  make  a 
speech.  This  was  promptly  denied.  He  was  spoken  of  as  its 
candidate  for  President,  but  he  gave  it  no  encouragement.  His 
name  was  not  brought  up  or  voted  on  in  the  convention,  be 
cause  his  friends  there  knew  he  would  not  permit  it.  It  was 
apparent  he  was  not  the  man  to  lead  such  a  movement.  For  its 
success,  it  would  have  to  depend  on  uniting  the  Democrats. 
Sumner  could  not  do  this.  His  whole  career  for  the  destruction 
of  slavery  and  for  the  equal  rights  of  the  colored  people  had 
been  antagonistic  to  them  and  he  could  not  hope  to  be  accept 
able  to  the  Southern  States.  The  logical  candidate  was  Charles 
Francis  Adams,  who  had  been  absent  from  the  country  as 
Minister  to  Great  Britain,  during  the  war  and  who  led  the  vote 
on  each  ballot  in  the  convention  till  the  one  on  which  Greeley 
was  nominated.  But  it  is  not  likely  that  the  movement  would 
have  succeeded  with  any  candidate.  Great  as  the  dissatisfac 
tion  was,  and  certainly  with  reason,  it  was  not  for  cause  suffi 
ciently  grave  nor  so  widespread  as  to  overcome  the  force  of 
established  precedent  for  two  terms  and  Grant's  great  war 
record. 


682  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumner  was  in  close  touch  with  the  leaders  of  the  movement 
and  he  furnished  a  draft  of  the  platform.  It  was  carried  from 
Washington  to  the  convention  by  F.  W.  Bird.  It  declared  for 
equal  rights,  for  emancipation  and  equal  suffrage  and  against 
any  reopening  of  the  questions  settled  by  the  Amendments  to 
the  Constitution.  With  the  tariff  there  was  trouble,  as  might 
naturally  be  expected,  when  it  was  sought  to  unite  in  the  same 
party  men  of  such  pronounced  opinions  and  so  widely  separated 
as  Horace  Greeley,  who  had  been  a  lifelong  protectionist  and 
had  written  a  book,  much  of  it  in  support  of  his  position,  and 
Democrats  who  had  always  stood  for  free  trade,  or  a  tariff  for 
revenue  only.  The  leaders  of  the  movement,  those  who  called 
for  it,  created  it  and  were  the  strongest  in  support  of  it,  the 
Missouri  Liberals,  the  delegates  from  New  York,  Ohio,  Illinois 
and  the  New  England  States  were  generally  protectionists. 
There  was  a  sharp  contention  over  it  in  the  convention,  but  it 
was  finally  harmonized,  in  the  only  frank  way  apparently  pos 
sible,  by  agreeing  to  disagree.  A  plank  was  adopted  remitting 
that  subject  to  the  people  in  their  Congressional  districts  and 
to  Congress  free  from  Executive  interference, — a  position  that 
Sumner  afterwards  declared  was  the  most  candid  expression  on 
the  subject  ever  made  by  any  convention  of  his  time.  The 
platform  demanded  the  immediate  arid  absolute  removal  of  all 
disabilities  imposed  on  account  of  the  war;  and  it  was  this 
plank,  with  that  on  the  abuse  of  the  civil  service  under  Grant, 
that  were  mostly  urged,  by  its  supporters,  in  the  campaign 
which  followed. 

For  three  months  after  this  convention,  Sumner  maintained 
a  reserve  as  to  what  course  he  would  pursue.  To  one  urging 
him  on  the  subject,  he  wrote :  "  I  shall  not  speak  until  I  can 
see  the  whole  field  and  especially  the  bearing  on  the  colored 
race.  I  mean  to  fail  in  nothing  by  which  they  may  be  helped; 
therefore  all  stories  as  to  what  I  shall  do  or  shall  not  are  in 
ventions.  *  *  *  But  I  seek  two  things:  (1)  The  protection 
of  the  colored  race,  and  (2)  The  defeat  of  Grant."  He  still 
hoped  to  accomplish  the  latter  and  thereby  remove  any  occa 
sion  for  a  separation  from  his  party.  He  was  for  some  weeks 
engaged  in  the  preparation  of  a  speech  against  Grant,  which 
he  was  determined  to  deliver  in  the  Senate,  on  the  first  oppor 
tunity  that  presented  itself.  He  had  hoped  to  find  an  occa 
sion,  on  the  presentation  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
sale  of  arms  to  France.  But  that  came  in  too  late  for  a  time 
to  be  set  apart  for  its  consideration.  On  the  thirty-first  day 
of  May  the  Sundry  Civil  Appropriation  Bill  came  up  and 
Sumner  seized  the  opportunity  then  afforded,  in  the  closing 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  G83 

days  of  the  session,  and  within  a  week  of  the  assembling  of  the 
Republican  National  Convention  at  Philadelphia. 

When  Stunner  obtained  the  floor  and  commenced  to  speak, 
there  were  only  a  few  persons  in  the  Senate  Chamber.  Routine 
business  was  being  transacted  and  it  was  receiving  little  atten 
tion,  for  the  night  session  of  the  previous  day  had  continued 
until  three  that  morning.  The  speech  was  entirely  unexpected. 
As  he  continued  and  word  went  out  that  he  had  the  floor  and 
was  arraigning  the  Administration,  Senators  sought  their  seats, 
Members  of  the  other  House  came  in  and  the  galleries  filled. 
Schurz  was  there,  listening  attentively,  with  sympathetic  in 
terest,  to  what  was  said;  Conkling  was  there,  too,  feigning  a 
proud  indifference.  For  a  while  he  sat  apparently  meditating 
what  answer,  as  leader  of  the  Administration  forces,  he  could 
make.  Again,  with  the  air  of  one  who  considered  what  was 
said  unworthy  of  attention,  he  stood  in  a  group  on  the  floor 
within  a  few  feet  of  the  speaker  noisily  conferring  with  Senators 
Morton  and  Carpenter,  of  the  same  ring,  until  called  to  order. 
Some  Members  of  the  Cabinet  were  there  and  heard  him  charge 
that  two,  perhaps  three,  of  this  "  official  family "  had  re 
ceived  their  appointments  in  apparent  return  for  gifts  made  to 
the  President.  Some  of  his  "  military  secretaries  "  were  there 
and  learned  that  one  Senator,  at  least,  thought  their  place  was 
in  the  camp  and  not  in  the  Council  Chamber.  While  some  dele 
gates  to  the  approaching  convention,  on  their  way  to  Phila 
delphia,  discovered  that  they  had  stopped  off  at  the  Capitol,  un 
expectedly  to  learn  some  new  things  about  the  candidate  they 
were  intending  to  support.  For  three  hours  he  held  the  atten 
tion  of  his  audience  easily  to  the  end,  and  the  Senate  then 
adjourned. 

The  speech  was  destined  to  be  the  last,  as  it  was  one  of  the 
best  of  those  great  efforts,  like  his  Crime  against  Kansas,  his 
Barbarism  of  Slavery,  and  for  the  Purchase  of  Alaska,  made  by 
Stunner  at  varying  intervals  on  the  floor  by  the  Senate,  that 
placed  him  in  the  front  rank  of  parliamentary  orators.  It 
has  hardly  its  equal  in  kind  in  the  English  language.  A  speech 
like  it  would  not  be  made  in  Europe ;  and  in  America  it  never 
was.  It  finds  its  likeness  in  those  efforts  of  Demosthenes,  striv 
ing  to  rouse  the  dying  energies  of  his  country  against  the  ag 
gressions  of  Philip.  Sumner  was  full  of  his  subject;  it  had 
occupied  his  thoughts  for  many  months  and  he  spoke  as  one 
weighing  well  his  words,  appreciating  the  consequence  to  him 
self  and  yet  determined  to  speak  the  whole  truth  plainly  and 
without  fear.  In  reviewing  the  speech  afterwards,  Elaine  said, 
"  Sumner  sought  to  challenge  and  prevent  the  renomination  of 


684  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

General  Grant  by  concentrating  in  one  massive  broadside  all 
that  could  be  suggested  against  him." 

At  the  beginning,  as  if  to  leave  no  equivocal  impression  of 
his  position  and  show  that  it  was  the  man  and  not  the  party  he 
fought,  that  he  abated  not  one  jot  of  his  principles,  he  said : 
"  Mr.  President : —  I  have  no  hesitation  in  declaring  myself 
a  member  of  the  Republican  Party,  and  one  of  the  straightest 
of  the  sect.  I  doubt  if  any  Senator  can  point  to  earlier  or  more 
constant  service  in  its  behalf.  I  began  at  the  beginning,  and 
from  that  early  day  have  never  failed  to  sustain  its  candidates 
and  to  advance  its  principles.  For  these  I  have  labored  always 
by  speech  and  vote,  in  the  Senate  and  elsewhere, — at  first  with 
few  only,  but  at  last  as  success  began  to  dawn,  then  with  mul 
titudes  flocking  forward.  In  this  cause  I  never  asked  who  were 
my  associates  or  how  many  they  would  number.  In  the  con 
sciousness  of  right  I  was  willing  to  be  alone.  To  such  a  party 
with  which  so  much  of  my  life  is  intertwined,  I  have  no  com 
mon  attachment.  Not  without  regrets  can  I  see  it  suffer;  not 
without  a  pang  can  I  see  it  changed  from  its  original  character, 
for  such  a  change  is  death.  Therefore  do  I  ask,  with  no  com 
mon  feeling,  that  the  peril  which  menaces  it  may  pass  away." 

He  spoke  of  the  pretension  of  the  President,  in  defiance  of 
all  law,  treating  for  the  annexation  of  San  Domingo,  pledging 
his  personal  influence  in  support  of  it,  surrounding  the  country 
with  ships  of  our  navy  to  terrify  it  into  submission,  threaten 
ing  the  republic  of  Haiti;  and  then  reading  a  Senator  out  of 
the  party  because  he  dared  in  his  place  in  the  Senate  to  protest 
against  such  high-handed  measures.  Such  personal  government, 
he  insisted,  was  unconstitutional  and  unrepublican ;  it  was  one- 
man  power  elevated  above  all  else.  He  argued  that  one  always 
a  soldier  could  not  later  in  life  become  a  statesman,  that  prep 
aration  for  each  was  needed,  that  their  characters  were  different, 
that,  unlike  Washington  and  Jackson,  whose  training  had  been 
civil  as  well  as  military,  Grant,  whose  training  had  been  ex 
clusively  military,  was  in  fact,  as  shown  by  his  Administration, 
unfitted  for  the  Presidency. 

He  then  passed  to  two  typical  proofs  of  Grant's  unfitness — 
Nepotism  and  Gift-Taking — wherein  he  had  converted  the 
Presidential  Office  into  a  personal  instrumentality.  One  list, 
he  said,  placed  the  number  of  persons  related  to  the  President 
by  blood  or  marriage,  holding  office  of  the  Government,  at 
forty-two ;  it  was  conceded  there  were  thirteen ;  no  one  of  whom 
but  for  the  relationship,  would  have  had  his  place.  He  argued 
that  thus  a  pernicious  example  of  kingly  rule  was  being  intro 
duced  almost  for  the  first  time  into  our  Republic.  Gift-taking, 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  685 

without  precedent,  was  likewise  being  introduced,  he  said;  that 
at  least  two,  perhaps  three,  members  of  the  Cabinet  had  been 
repaid  for  gifts,  by  their  appointments,  thus  subordinating  the 
public  service  to  personal  considerations  and  he  instanced  the 
notorious  case  of  Murphy,  maintained  at  the  head  of  the  New 
York  Custom  House  and  another  at  the  head  of  the  New  Or 
leans  Custom  House  for  similar  reasons.  He  admitted  that 
the  President  had  a  discretion  in  the  appointment  of  his  Cab 
inet,  but  it  was  a  constitutional  discretion,  to  be  regulated  by 
the  interest  of  the  country  and  not  by  mere  personal  will,  that 
men  must  be  selected,  qualified  for  the  place,  not  as  A.  T. 
Stewart  of  New  York  for  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  of  no 
experience  and  disqualified,  by  his  interest  as  an  importer  under 
the  law;  or  Borie  for  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  till  then  so  un 
heard  of,  that  the  great  Admiral  Farragut,  over  whom  he  was 
placed  in  authority,  was  constrained  to  start  the  inquiry,  "  Do 
you  know  anything  of  Borie  ?  "  that  Borie  a  little  later  con 
fessed  his  disqualification  and  resigned ;  and  Washburn,  Grant's 
Congressman  during  the  war,  who  was  given  the  appointment 
of  Secretary  of  State  as  a  personal  compliment,  with  the  un 
derstanding  that  he  would  forthwith  resign. 

He  spoke  of  the  illegal  "  military  ring  "  at  the  White  House, 
Generals  Babcock,  Porter,  Badeau  and  Dent,  acting  as  Grant's 
secretaries  and  adding  their  military  titles  to  the  civil  papers 
they  signed.  He  said  the  President  had  "  operated  by  a  sys 
tem  of  combinations,  military,  political,  and  even  senatorial, 
having  their  orbits  about  him,  so  that  like  the  planet  Saturn, 
he  was  surrounded  by  rings — nor  did  the  similitude  end  here, 
for  his  rings,  like  those  of  the  planet,  were  held  in  position  by 
satellites."  He  called  attention  to  irregularities,  in  the  War 
Department,  whereby  the  Secretary  himself  was  subjected  in 
authority  to  military  officers  and  in  the  Navy  Department 
where  the  duties  of  an  incompetent  Secretary  were  devolved  on 
Admiral  Porter;  and  in  the  Indian  Bureau,  his  effort  to  ab 
sorb  it  into  the  War  Department  and  change  its  character  as 
a  part  of  the  civil  service,  by  detailing  sixty  army  officers,"  left 
out  of  their  regimental  organizations  by  the  consolidation  of 
regiments,"  for  service  there,  until  the  abuse  was  remedied  by 
an  act  of  Congress. 

Sumner  dwelt  on  Grant's  interference  with  elections,  by 
troops  at  the  poles  in  the  South,  and  his  endeavor  to  control 
conventions  by  the  use  of  patronage  in  the  North,  of  his  dis 
position  to  quarrel  with  officials,  who  were  not  submissive  to 
him;  in  the  Cabinet,  as  shown  by  constant  removals;  in  the 
Senate  as  shown  by  the  interference  with  committees;  in  the 


G86  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  BUHNER 

House  and  in  the.  army.  He  said  the  ruler  of  forty  million 
people  had  no  right  to  quarrel  with  any  one.,  because  his  position 
was  too  exalted;  it  shocked  the  decencies  of  life  and  jarred  the 
harmony  of  the  universe.  "  Evidently,"  he  said,  "  our  Presi 
dent  has  not  read  the  eleventh  Commandment :  '  A  President  of 
the  United  States  shall  never  quarrel/  r  But  to  Grant,  he  said, 
"  a  quarrel  is  not  only  a  constant  necessity,  but  a  perquisite  of 
office.  To  nurse  a  quarrel,  like  tending  a  horse,  is  in  his  list 
of  Presidential  duties."  *  *  *  "  Men  take  their  places  in 
history  according  to  their  deeds.  The  flattery  of  life  is  then 
superceded  by  the  truthful  record,  and  rulers  do  not  escape 
judgment.  Louis  the  Tenth  of  France  has  the  designation 
of  Le  Hutin  or  '  The  Quarreller ?  by  which  he  is  known  in  the 
long  line  of  French  Kings.  And  so  in  the  long  line  of  Ameri 
can  Chief -Magistrates  has  our  President  vindicated  for  him 
self  the  same  title." 

He  argued  that  with  the  adoption  of  all  his  Presidential  pre 
tensions  the  creed  of  the  party  ceased  to  be  Eepublican  and 
became  Grantism,  that  it  became  no  longer  a  political  party, 
but  a  personal  party.  He  could  say  he  was  no  man's  man  nor 
did  he  belong  to  any  personal  party.  He  plead  for  a  single 
term  for  the  President,  that  all  temptation  to  use  the  great  in 
fluence  of  the  office,  for  a  re-election,  might  be  removed  and 
urged  that  the  National  Eepublican  Convention  might  not  be 
made  another  "  Presidential  King,"  a  mere  expansion  of  the 
"  Military  Eing  "  of  the  White  House,  the  "  Senatorial  Eing  " 
of  the  Senate  Chamber  and  the  "  Political  Eings "  of  the 
Custom  Houses  of  New  York  and  New  Orleans.  "  A  National 
Convention,  which  is  a  Presidential  ring,  could  not  represent 
the  Eepublican  Party." 

"  Much  rather,"  he  said  in  closing,  "  would  I  see  the  party 
to  which  I  am  dedicated,  under  the  image  of  a  life-boat  not  to 
be  sunk  by  wind  or  wave  *  *  *  I  do  not  fear  the  Demo 
cratic  Party,  nothing  from  them  can  harm  our  life-boat.  But 
I  do  fear  a  quarrelsome  pilot,  unused  to.  th3  sea,  but  preten 
tious  in  command,  who  occupies  himself  in  loading  aboard,  his 
own  unserviceable  relations  and  personal  patrons,  while  he 
drives  away  the  experienced  seamen  who  know  the  craft  and 
her  voyage.  Here  is  a  peril  which  no  life-boat  can  stand." 

The  speech  created  a  sensation  in  the  Senate.  Soon  after, 
Grant's  friends  gave  Sumner  notice  that  he  was  no  longer  in 
good  standing  with  them.  When  he  arose  that  evening,  in  the 
Senate,  to  claim  a  usual  courtesy,  he  was  curtly  answered  by 
Conkling  that,  after  what  had  occurred,  he  must  know  that 
courtesy  was  no  longer  applicable  there.  Some  brief  impromptu 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER   .  687 

replies  were  made  to  the  speech  that  evening.  But  it  was 
desirable  that  a  full  defence  of  the  President  should  be  made 
on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  before  adjournment,  for  it  was 
realized  that  Sumner's  speech,  though  he  had  not  yet  joined  the 
Liberal  Eepublican  movement  would  become,  as  it  did,  the 
opening  speech  of  the  campaign  against  Grant.  More  time 
was  needed  to  prepare  to  make  answers  to  it  and  the  day  fixed 
for  adjournment  of  the  Senate  was  extended  for  a  week,  during 
which,  extended  replies  were  made  by  the  President's  friends. 
They  were  generally  severe  upon  Sumner,  Carpenter's  and 
Chandler's  being  noticeably  so;  Logan's  was  the  ablest.  He 
dwelt  on  Grant's  service  to  the  country  as  a  soldier,  his  stand 
for  the  payment  of  the  Government  bonds  in  gold  and  for 
the  maintenance  of  a  sound  financial  policy,  subjects  which 
Sumner  had  omitted  and  for  which  Grant  was  entitled  to 
credit.  Sumner's  speech  called  out  leading  editorials  in  the 
daily  papers.  It  was  the  first  public  declaration  of  his  attitude 
toward  Grant,  and  in  the  present  unusual  condition  of  politi 
cal  parties,  with  interests  now  excited  by  the  approaching 
convention,  many  people  who  were  accustomed  to  follow  his 
leadership  were  waiting  to  learn  what  his  position  would  be. 

Upon  the  work  of  the  convention  it  had  little  effect.  It  came 
too  late  to  affect  the  nomination  of  Grant.  The  delegates  were 
already  chosen  and  generally  were  committed,  to  their  constit 
uents,  as  to  the  vote  they  would  give;  and  they  could  not  be 
changed  now.  Grant  was  nominated  on  the  sixth  day  of  June, 
without  a  dissenting  vote. 

The  chief  contest  of  the  convention  was  over  the  nomination 
for  Vice-President,  between  Colfax  of  Indiana  and  Wilson  of 
Massachusetts.  The  former  had  early  in  the  year  announced 
that  he  would  not  be  a  candidate  for  renomination  and  the 
latter  then  appeared  and  had  made  much  progress.  So  when 
Colfax  reappeared  in  the  field,  shortly  before  the  convention, 
he  found  a  vigorous  contest  awaiting  him.  The  result  was 
close,  but  Sumner's  colleague,  in  the  Senate,  was  nominated 
on  the  first  ballot.  Owing  to  the  now  well-known  opposition 
of  Sumner  to  Grant,  it  was  important  to  have  the  candidate 
for  Vice-President  in  New  England  and  this  contributed  to  the 
success  of  Wilson. 

The  platform  adopted,  declared  for  complete  liberty  and 
equal  civil  rights  for  the  colored  people  and  the  mainte 
nance  of  all  the  recent  Constitutional  Amendments,  thus  upon 
the  issues  in  which  Sumner  felt  most  interest,  placing  itself 
upon  the  same  plane  as  the  Liberal  Republicans.  The  Demo 
cratic  Convention  met  at  Baltimore  on  the  ninth  day  of  July 


688  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and,  accepting  Greeley  and  Brown  as  their  candidates,  they 
adopted,  without  modification,  the  platform  of  the  Liberal 
Republicans.  Thus  Sumner,  though  disappointed  by  the  nom 
ination  of  Grant,  saw  all  the  political  parties  united  on  the 
issue  for  equal  rights  of  all  men,  of  every  color,  for  which  he 
had  waged  such  a  long  and  persistent  warfare. 

The  campaign  opened  with  unusual  promptness.  Within 
two  weeks  of  the  adjournment  of  the  Democratic  convention, 
Conkling  made  the  opening  speech  for  the  Republicans  at 
Cooler's  Institute  in  New  York  City.  He  had  not  made  a 
reply  to  Sumner  in  the  Senate  but  reserved  it  for  this  more 
elaborate  occasion.  Senator  Sherman  and  other  leaders  took 
the  field  with  equal  promptness  and  before  the  end  of  the 
month  the  campaign  had  become  general.  The  day  after  the 
Democratic  convention  adjourned,  a  considerable  number  of 
the  leading  colored  citizens  of  Washington  addressed  a  letter 
to  Sumner,  asking  his  advice  as  to  the  course  they  should  pur 
sue.  He  delayed  an  answer  until  July  twenty-ninth  and  then  in 
an  open  letter,  after  contrasting  the  relation  of  Greeley  and 
Grant  to  the  colored  race,  he  advised  them,  as  he  expressed  the 
purpose  to  do,  to  vote  for  Greeley.  Two  days  later  he  was  an 
swered  in  an  open  letter  by  Speaker  Elaine,  arraigning  him  as 
recreant  to  both  party  and  principle,  in  so  advising  colored 
voters.  Sumner  answered  under  date  of  August  fifth  in  another 
open  letter. 

To  this  charge  of  personal  recreancy,  he  answered  with  an 
honest  burst  of  feeling,  which  revealed  the  cause  of  his  own 
opposition :  "  The  personal  imputation  you  make  upon  me  I 
repel  with  the  indignation  of  an  honest  man.  I  was  a  faithful 
supporter  of  the  President  until  somewhat  tardily  awakened 
by  his  painful  conduct  on  the  island  of  San  Domingo,  involv 
ing  seizure  of  the  war  power  in  violation  of  the  Constitution 
and  indignity  to  the  Black  Republic  in  violation  of  Interna 
tional  Law ;  and  when  I  remonstrated  against  these  intolerable 
outrages,  I  was  set  upon  by  those  acting  in  his  behalf.  Such 
is  the  origin  of  my  opposition.  I  could  not  have  done  less  with 
out  failure  in  that  duty  which  is  with  me  the  rule  of  life." 

To  the  Speaker's  reminder  that  he  had  now  entered  into 
company  with  Secessionists  and  with  the  confederates  of  his 
former  assailant,  Preston  S.  Brooks,  he  indignantly  retorted: 
"What  has  Preston  Brooks  to  do  with  the  Presidential  elec 
tion?  Never  while  a  sufferer,  did  anybody  hear  me  speak  of 
him  in  unkindness ;  and  now  after  the  lapse  of  more  than  half 
a  generation,  I  will  not  unite  with  you  in  dragging  him  from 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  689 

the  grave,  where  he  sleeps,  to  aggravate  the  passions  of  a  polit 
ical  conflict,  and  arrest  the  longing  for  concord." 

Until  near  the  middle  of  August  Sumner  remained  in  Wash 
ington,  holding  himself  aloof  from  any  further  participation 
in  politics,  but  plied  with  letters,  some  of  them  from  Greeley 
and  the  leaders  of  the  new  movement  thanking  him  for  the 
stand  he  had  taken,  others  pressing  him  to  make  speeches  for 
the  ticket  in  various  States,  others  from  old  friends  commenting 
variously  upon  his  speech  in  the  Senate.  Some  of  them  spoke 
approvingly,  others  in  kindness  differed  from  him.  Even  those 
differing  from  him  generally  agreed  that  his  motives  were  good. 
To  several  friends,  as  with  G.  W.  Curtis,  of  Harper's  Weekly 
and  Henry  Wilson,  his  colleague,  he  expressed  regret  that  he 
had  not  been  able  to  bring  them  to  his  way  of  thinking.  But 
there  was  no  break  between  them.  The  situation  was  wearing 
upon  him,  growing  old  and  almost  sick  as  he  was. 

He  was  working  long  hours  upon  the  edition  of  his  Works. 
Life  seemed  to  be  passing  and  he  was  anxious  to  have  this  work 
completed.  The  twelve  to  fifteen  hours  a  day  he  was  devoting 
himself,  in  this  way,  to  labor,  was  too  much  for  one  in  his  con 
dition  of  health.  It  will  be  remembered  that  he  had  a  serious 
sick  spell,  during  the  previous  year,  after  his  first  speech  against 
annexation ;  and  again  recurring  symptoms  during  the  last  ses 
sion,  in  the  debate  on  the  French  Arms  question;  and  he  had 
been  compelled  at  other  times  to  seek  the  advice  of  a  physician. 
He  found  his  heart  affected  and  quiet  and  absence  of  excite 
ment  necessary. 

The  hard  lines  in  which  his  last  days  were  cast  were  telling 
upon  his  personal  appearance.  The  noble  form  appeared  broken 
and  its  muscular  elasticity  was  gone  and  his  capacity  for  ex- 
erton  seemed  exhausted.  Those  who  remembered  him  "  stand 
ing  sturdily  upon  their  old  platforms,  almost  arrogant  in  the 
consciousness  of  intellectual  and  physical  strength,  full  of 
vigor  and  dilating  with  the  courage  of  opinion,  the  Ajax  about 
whom  the  young  men  of  Massachusetts  rallied  for  many  a  moral 
contest,  and  followed  in  the  onset  of  many  a  forlorn  political 
hope  "  saw  sad  changes  in  him  now,  that  silenced  the  spirit  of 
criticism  and  awakened  only  tender  recollections  of  the  great 
work  he  had  undertaken  and  had  performed  so  well. 

On  the  evening  of  August  ninth,  1872,  the  colored  people 
of  the  District  united  to  make  his  departure  from  Washington 
the  occasion  of  a  serenade.  They  gathered  at  his  house,  in 
number,  one  of  the  largest  that  had  been  seen  in  Washington 
for  such  a  purpose,  and  Sumner  being  introduced  by  Dr. 
Augusta,  one  of  their  race,  responded  in  a  brief  speech.  He 


690  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

reminded  them  that  for  the  first  time  in  our  history  all  politi 
cal  parties  were  pledged  to  the  equality  of  all  before  the  law. 
Of  the  early  passage  of  a  Civil  Rights  Bill  to  relieve  them  from 
any  exclusion  or  discrimination  on  account  of  color,  he  felt 
there  was  now  no  doubt.  This,  he  added,  was  a  strange  contrast 
to  their  condition  when  he  entered  upon  his  public  duties  in 
Washington,  more  than  twenty  years  before.  Then  slavery  was 
in  the  ascendency,  giving  the  law  to  all  the  usages  of  life.  Now 
the  courtroom,  the  school-house,  the  horse-car  and  the  ballot 
box  were  opened,  never  to  be  closed  against  them  again. 

Soon  after  he  reached  Boston,  he  was  formally  invited,  by 
the  Liberal  Republican  State  Committee,  to  address  a  public 
meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall.  He  had  purposed  to  take  no  farther 
part  in  the  campaign,  but  he  felt  he  could  not  resist  this  new 
pressure  from  old  friends  at  home.  He  prepared  a  speech  for 
the  occasion,  but  recurring  symptoms  of  his  old  complaint 
caused  him  to  hesitate  at  the  attempt  to  deliver  it.  Death  he 
did  not  fear  so  much ;  but  he  had  been  repeatedly  warned  that 
paralysis,  accompanied  by  physical  and  perhaps  mental  dis 
ability,  might  be  the  result  of  his  disease.  The  latter  result 
he  especially  dreaded.  At  last  he  gave  up  his  contemplated 
purpose  of  speaking  in  Faneuil  Hall  and  handed  the  manu 
script  of  his  speech  to  the  committee,  with  permission  to  pub 
lish  it.  It  accordingly  appeared  in  the  newspapers,  though  it 
was  never  delivered. 

In  it  he  reviewed  briefly  the  character,  of  the  two  candidates, 
Greeley  and  Grant,  and  the  reasons  he  had  before  urged  for 
opposing  the  latter  and  dwelt  at  length  on  the  question  of  grant 
ing  amnesty  to  all  the  Confederates  and  the  complete  recon 
ciliation  of  the  North  and  the  South.  This  was  the  new  issue 
that  was  brought  forward  and  was  being  pressed  by  the  friends 
of  the  Liberal  movement.  Sunnier  while  pressing  for  the  de 
struction  of  slavery  and  for  equal  rights  had  never  ceased  to 
hope  for  a  reunited  country  under  better  conditions. 

Then  by  advice  of  his  physician  and  near  friends,  to  seek 
rest  and  avoid  all  excitement,  he  sailed  for  Europe  on  the  third 
day  of  September,  1872,  not  to  return  until  after  the  election. 
It  was  to  be  his  last  trip  abroad.*  His  speech  appeared  in  the 
newspapers  of  the  day  after  his  departure. 

*  The  day  before  sailing  he  made  his  will  giving,  to  Henry  W.  Long 
fellow,  Francis  V.  Balch  and  Edward  L.  Pierce,  as  trustees,  all  his  papers, 
manuscripts  and  letter  books;  and  to  them  three  thousand  dollars  to  com 
plete  the  publication  of  his  works;  to  the  library  of  Harvard  College  his 
books  and  autographs;  to  the  City  of  Boston  for  the  Art  Musoum  his 
pictures  and  engravings;  to  his  "  friends  of  many  years  Henry  W.  Long- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  691 

Before  he  left,  the  result  of  the  election  in  North  Carolina, 
the  first  State  to  vote,  and  therefore  the  preliminary  test  of  the 
drift  of  popular  feeling,  was  known;  it  indicated  the  re-elec 
tion  of  Grant.  Before  his  return,  the  victory  was  complete  and 
Greeley  was  overwhelmingly  defeated.  All  of  the  Northern 
States  and  all  of  the  Southern  States,  but  six,  voted  for  Grant. 
This  crushing  defeat  was  too  much.  Greeley  turned  from  it  to 
plunge  anew  into  the  work  of  editing  The  Tribune,  where  at 
least  he  had  stood  without  a  peer.  But  coming  as  it  did  after 
years  of  hard  work  and  incessant  care,  following  the  strain  of 
a  heated  campaign  and  only  a  few  days  after  the  death  of  his 
devoted  wife,  the  heroic  mind  failed  and  his  light  went  out. 
lie  died  on  the  twenty-seventh  day  of  the  same  November  that 
witnessed  his  defeat, — only  three  days  after  Sumner  landed 
on  his  return  from  Europe. 

There  were  various  causes  for  this  result  of  the  election. 
Grant  was  a  tried  man  in  the  public  service.  His  military 
record  was  a  great  one  and  the  nation's  gratitude  for  his  suc 
cess  in  saving  the  union  was  still  warm.  Shiloh,  Vicksburg, 
Chattanooga  and  Appomattox  were  fruitful  subjects  for  ef 
fective  appeals  during  the  campaign.  Greeley's  triumphs  were 
all  those  of  peace.  Troubles  in  the  Southern  States  were  still 
feared  and  it  was  felt  that  the  strong  arm  of  the  soldier  was 
needed  to  hold  the  lawless  elements  there  in  check.  During  his 
first  term,  Grant  had  gained  the  confidence  of  the  financial 

fellow  and  Samuel  G.  Howe"  his  bronzes;  to  the  daughters  of  Longfel 
low,  two  thousand  dollars  and  a  like  amount  to  those  of  Howe  and  James 
T.  Furness  of  Philadelphia  '  in  token  of  his  gratitude  for  the  friendship 
their  parents  had  shown  him  ' ;  to  Hannah  R.  Jacobs  only  surviving  sister 
of  his  mother  an  annuity  of  five  hundred  dollars  for  life ;  a  '  provision  for 
perpetual  care  of  his  mother's  lot  at  Mount  Auburn ' ;  one  thousand  dol 
lars  to  Harvard  College  for  an  annual  prize  for  the  best  dissertation  by 
any  student  "  on  universal  peace  and  the  methods  by  which  war  may  be 
permanently  suspended."  And  to  this  bequest  he  added:  "I  do  this  in 
the  hope  of  drawing  the  attention  of  students  to  the  practicability  of  or 
ganizing  peace  among  nations  which  I  sincerely  believe  may  be  done. 
I  cannot  doubt  that  the  same  modes  of  decision  which  now  prevail  be 
tween  towns  and  between  individuals,  between  smaller  communities, 
may  be  extended  to  nations."  All  the  residue  of  his  estate,  real  and  per 
sonal,  he  directed  to  be  sold  and  the  proceeds  to  be  distributed,  half 
to  his  sister  Julia,  and  half  to  Harvard  College,  "for  the  benefit  of  the 
College  library",  'his  desire  being  that  the  income  should  be  applied: 
to  the  purchasing  of  books  relating  to  politics  and  fine  arts.'  He  added 
"This  bequest  is  made  in  filial  regard  for  the  College.  In  selecting 
especially  the  library,  I  am  governed  by  the  consideration  that  all  my  life 
I  have  been  a  user  of  books,  and  having  few  of  my  own,  I  have  relied  on 
the  libraries  of  friends  and  on  public  libraries;  so  that  what  I  now  do  is 
only  a  return  for  what  I  have  freely  received."  This  will  was  the  one 
admitted  to  probate  after  his  death. 


692  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

circles,  by  his  stand  against  repudiation,  in  any  form,  and  for 
the  payment  of  the  national  debt  in  gold.  He  was  considered 
a  safe  man  upon  these  issues,  that  were  still  felt  to  be  in 
volved.  On  the  other  hand  there  was  a  want  of  confidence  in 
Greeley.  He  was  felt  to  be  untried  and  of  an  experimental 
disposition.  Some  personal  peculiarities,  that  were  dwelt  on 
by  campaign  speakers,  heightened  this  impression  of  him.  Such 
traits  do  not  impress  plain  business  men  favorably.  Another 
cause  for  the  size  of  Grant's  majority  was  the  dissatisfaction  of 
old  line  Democrats  with  the  course  of  their  party  in  taking  up 
a  Eepublican  candidate.  After  they  saw  the  tide  was  setting 
towards  defeat,  this  class  abstained  from  the  campaign  and 
even  refused  to  vote. 

The  objections  that  Sumner  urged  against  Grant  were  gener 
ally  conceded,  even  by  his  supporters,  but  they  were  objections 
that  appealed  to  a  Senator  or  a  Congressman,  rather  than  to 
the  plain  people.  His  course  towards  San  Domingo  and  Haiti 
was  a  mistake  and  indefensible.  He  had  appointed  too  many 
relatives  to  office ;  and  he  had  accepted  gifts  and  had  placed  the 
givers  in  high  positions  in  the  public  service;  both  in  bad 
taste.  He  had  appointed  unfit  men  to  office  and  permitted  a 
favored  few  to  control  too  much  patronage,  creating  well 
grounded  complaints  of  the  rings  that  disgraced  his  admin 
istration.  He  had  shown  a  good  deal  of  a  disposition  to  do  as 
he  pleased,  without  considering  much  the  feelings  or  the  opin 
ions  of  others,  and  if  they  opposed  him  to  use  his  authority  to 
displace  them,  as  he  had  done  in  frequent  instances  with  mem 
bers  of  his  Cabinet  and  with  Sumner  and  his  Committee ;  this 
was  not  with  proper  regard  for  the  limitations  of  his  own 
office  or  the  rights  of  others.  But  all  these  things  could  be 
urged  with  little  effect  to  a  popular  audience.  It  was  much 
easier  to  arouse  enthusiasm  over  the  recollections  of  the  war, 
when  many  of  his  soldiers  were  scattered  through  the  audience. 

Sumner  provoked  disagreeable  antagonisms,  by  opposing 
Grant,  which  embittered  the  remaining  months  of  his  life.  It 
separated  him  from  his  party.  And  it  encouraged  some 
friends  of  Grant  within  it,  who  were  more  than  willing  to 
exhibit  their  hostility  in  various  ways,  with  the  hope  of  thereby 
gaining  new  favor  with  their  chief.  It  also  deprived  Sumner  of 
an  influence,  within  the  party,  that  he  might  have  easily  exerted, 
notwithstanding  all  that  Grant  could  do.  Grant  was  only  one 
of  the  party,  though  its  leader;  beyond  him  was  the  great 
Eepublican  organization,  which  revered  and  honored  Sumner 
and  with  whose  principles  he  was  in  entire  harmony.  He 
should  not  have  allowed  one  man  to  separate  him  from  it.  He 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  (]93 

went  too  far,  when  he  confounded  Grant  with  the  party,  and  for 
the  sake  of  defeating  one  was  willing  to  defeat  both. 

But  on  the  other  hand  Sumner  was  never  a  politician.  He 
felt  that  by  supporting  Grant  a  principle  would  be  sacrificed. 
He  believed  that  Grant  had  demonstrated  his  unfitness  for  the 
office  and  that  having  done  so,  he  should  not  be  returned  to  it. 
He  thought  Greeley  was  a  better  representative  of  Republican 
principles  and  that  in  his  hands  those  principles  would  be  safe. 
Hence  he  unhesitatingly  followed  the  course  that  he. believed 
at  the  time  was  right.  How  much  this  conviction  was  modified 
by  farther  reflection  it  is  hard  to  determine.  Later  events  in 
dicate  that  both  Sumner  and  the  President  regretted  the  length 
to  which  they  were  carried  in  the  heat  of  their  controversy. 
Both  were  great  and  good  men  and  have  deserved  well  of  their 
country  and  have  an  enduring  place  in  her  history.  And  there 
is  reason  to  believe  Sumner  afterwards  felt  that  Greeley's  suc 
cess  would  in  the  end  have  subjected  the  nation  to  Democratic 
rule  and  to  a  ruinous  reaction.  At  that  time  this  would  have 
been  most  unfortunate.  Many  good  men  thought  they  foresaw 
it  and  believing  that  Greeley,  as  President,  could  not  prevent  it, 
even  though  having  confidence  in  him,  they  voted  against  him. 


CHAPTER  XLII 

LAST    TRIP   TO    EUROPE — THE    BATTLE    FLAG    BILL — RESOLUTION 

OF  CENSURE — SICKNESS 

SUMNER  reached  Liverpool  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  Septem 
ber,  1872,  after  a  voyage  of  eleven  days.  On  the  voyage  he 
experienced  his  customary  sea-sickness.  It  drew  from  him 
the  remark  that  the  sea  was  always  a  nuisance  to  him  and  he 
would  never  be  content  until  it  was  filled  up  so  that  he  could 
travel  everywhere  on  dry  ground.  But  he  enjoyed  comparative 
freedom  from  the  pains  of  the  heart  and  pressure  on  the  brain, 
which  he  experienced  in  Washington  and  Boston.  His  thoughts 
on  the  voyage  were  saddened  by  the  evidence  of  party  ill-will 
he  had  experienced,  at  home,  on  account  of  his  opposition  to 
Grant.  He  could  not  claim  generosity  from  old  acquaintances, 
who  had  turned  against  him  after  enjoying  favors  at  his  hands, 
for  he  had  only  acted  from  a  sense  of  duty  in  what  he  did; 
but  he  did  claim  justice  and  this  he  felt  he  had  not  received. 
For  he  said  he  never  in  his  life  acted  under  a  more  irresistible 
sense  of  duty,  than  in  opposing  annexation,  which  had  brought 
him  the  anger  of  the  Presidential  rings,  with  the  strange  co 
operation  of  some  Massachusetts  people,  calling  themselves  his 
friends.  Among  these  he  counted  Dr.  Samuel  G.  Howe,  who 
had  accepted  the  place  on  the  San  Domingo  Commission,  when 
Professor  Agassiz  refused  it,  and  William  Lloyd  Garrison,  who 
had  assailed  him  in  his  paper. 

To  his  friend  Edward  L.  Pierce,  to  whom  he  confided  this 
feeling,  he  afterwards  wrote  from  Paris,  showing  that  it  still 
haunted  him :  "  I  have  had  much  occasion  latterly  to  meditate 
on  the  justice  and  friendship  of  this  world,  especially  when 
crossed  by  the  mandate  of  political  power.  I  know  the  integrity 
of  my  conduct  and  the  motives  of  my  life.  Never  were  they 
more  clear  or  absolutely  blameless  than  now.  But  never,  in 
the  worst  days  of  slavery,  have  I  been  more  vindictively  pur 
sued  or  more  falsely  misrepresented." 

On  reaching  Liverpool,  he  was  subjected  to  a  new  annoyance, 
from  his  connection  with  the  Liberal  movement.  He  learned 
that  while  he  was  upon  the  ocean  and  without  any  previous 
consent  from  him,  the  Liberal  and  Democratic  parties  had  nom 
inated  him  for  Governor  of  Massachusetts.  The  nomination 

G94 


From  a  Photograph  taken  in  1873. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  GOo 

was  made  for  the  purpose  of  attracting  votes  in  the  State  to 
Greeley.  Upon  learning  it,  he,  at  once,  telegraphed  and  wrote 
declining  the  nomination.  He  also  wrote  privately  insisting 
that  his  declination  must  be  respected.  His  name  was  accord 
ingly  taken  from  the  ticket  and  that  of  his  friend  F.  W.  Bird 
substituted  for  it.  The  annoyance  caused  by  this  unauthorized 
use  of  his  name,  aggravated  his  sickness. 

He  had  resolved,  so  far  as  he  could,  while  he  remained  in 
Europe,  to  drive  politics  from  his  thoughts,  convinced  that  it 
was  provoking  his  troubles.  He  therefore  ceased  reading 
American  newspapers  entirely,  during  his  stay  abroad ;  and  to 
remove  himself  still  farther  from  touch  with  American  affairs, 
he  determined  to  leave  England  for  the  Continent  and  spend 
his  time  in  Paris.  He  hoped,  in  this  way,  to  separate  him 
self  as  much  as  possible  from  all  the  turmoil  and  excitement 
from  which  he  could  find  no  escape  at  home ;  and,  in  quiet,  find 
strength  and  recovery. 

He  was  met  on  landing  at  Liverpool  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
American  Club  and  spent  one  day  there  in  his  company  visiting 
some  places  of  interest  and  then  went  directly  to  London,  where 
he  remained  a  week.  Two  days  he  gave  to  the  British  Museum 
and  two  more  to  the  Bethnal  Green  Museum.  The  remainder 
of  the  time  he  spent  visiting  streets  and  buildings  and  seeing 
galleries  and  old  friends.  He  was  admitted  to  the  Athenaeum 
Club,  a  favorite  resort  when  he  was  in  London.  He  found  his 
friend  William  W.  Story,  the  sculptor,  son  of  Judge  Story,, 
spending  the  season  with  his  family  in  England,  near  Carlisle, 
and  Hugh  McCulloch,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  under 
President  Johnson,  another  old  acquaintance,  in  London.  Let 
ters  came  from  his  English  friends,  Eobert  Ingham,  inviting 
him  to  Newcastle  and  from  the  Duchess  of  Argyll  asking  him 
to  Inverary,  but  he  delayed,  hoping  to  see  them  on  his  return 
from  the  Continent.  He  went  on  to  Paris. 

Sumner  remained  in  Paris  a  month,  mainly  occupied  with 
visiting  galleries  and  places  of  interest  and  in  collecting  rare 
books  and  curios,  for  which  he  had  a  great  taste,  but  not  a 
very  accurate  judgment,  as  to  their  value.  It  was  here  that  he 
first  found  real  rest  and  physical  improvement,  by  a  complete 
diversion  from  affairs  at  home.  He  met  the  American  Minister, 
Washburn,  Morrison  R.  Waite  afterwards  Chief  Justice,  Ex- 
Governor  Bullock  of  Massachusetts  and  others  of  his  country 
men.  He  was  especially  indebted  to  Elliot  C.  Cowdin,  a  New 
York  merchant,  formerly  of  Boston,  but  now  representing  his 
house  in  Paris  where  he  had  his  family  and  a  residence.  A 
place  at  his  table  was  always  ready  for  Sumner ;  and  his  friends 


096  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

were  invited  to  dine  with  him.  Sumner  was  very  fond  of 
Mr.  Cowdin's  children  and  particularly  of  one,  little  Alice,  who 
had,  as  he  said,  "  so  sweet  a  name."  He  met  President  Thiers, 
dined  with  him  at  the  Palais  d'Elysee,  saw  his  friend  and 
correspondent,  the  Count  of  Paris,  and  Gambetta.  To  the  last, 
in  conversation,  he  said,  "  you  wish  to  found  a  republic  in 
France  without  religion.  I  do  not  know  your  country  well 
enough  to  express  an  opinion,  but  in  America  we  would  con 
sider  such  an  undertaking  chimerical  and  doomed  to  certain 
defeat/7  At  a  dinner  given  him  by  M.  de  Corcelle  he  met 
Remusat,  the  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  and  Gouland  the 
Minister  of  Finance.  Sumner  spoke  French  fluently  and  was 
everywhere  received  with  attention.  An  intelligent  French 
gentleman  wrote :  "  I  do  not  believe  that  an  American  has  ever 
made  so  great  an  impression  in  France."  And  this  good  im 
pression  was  mutual,  for  Sumner  left  France  this  time,  with 
a  higher  opinion  of  the  French  character,  than  ever  before. 

He  left  Paris  on  October  nineteenth,  returning  to  London  by 
the  twenty-sixth.  He  stopped  on  the  way  at  Brussels,  Antwerp 
and  The  Hague,  at  the  latter  place  spending  two  days  with  Mot 
ley.  He  met  Motley  again  at  Mr.  Sheridan's,  Frampton  Court, 
Dorchester,  with  other  guests,  among  them  the  Queen  of  Hol 
land,  when  Motley's  little  granddaughter  was  christened.  He 
remained  in  London  until  the  eleventh  day  of  November,  oc 
cupying  his  time  in  visiting  private  libraries  and  collections  of 
antiquities  and  porcelain,  among  others  being  admitted  to  a 
private  view  of  the  porcelain  and  pictures  of  Buckingham  Pal 
ace.  In  London,  as  in  Paris,  he  made  purchases  of  curios. 
Among  other  attentions  which  he  received,  Lord  Granville  came 
from  Walmer  Castle  to  London  to  entertain  him  at  dinner,  and 
Dean  and  Lady  Stanley  entertained  him  at  breakfast,  with 
William  W.  Story,  at  the  Westminster  deanery,  the  morning 
he  left  London.  Lady  Stanley  was  the  sister  of  Sir  Frederick 
Bruce,  the  British  Ambassador  at  Washington,  who  died  sud 
denly  in  Boston,  in  September,  1867.  Sumner  had  cared  for 
him,  in  his  last  hours,  and  superintended  the  arrangements  for 
his  funeral,  he  being  the  only  acquaintance  he  had  in  the  city. 
Sumner  had  been  on  cordial  terms  with  the  family  for  many 
years,  but  this  breakfast  was  to  be  their  last  meeting. 

From  London,  he  went  to  visit  the  Duke  of  Devonshire 
at  Chatsworth  Castle  and  then  to  Eochdale  to  spend  a  night 
with  John  Bright.  It  was  his  last  night  in  England.  They  sat 
up  and  talked  together  till  after  midnight,  of  the  President  and 
their  trouble,  of  San  Domingo  and  the  offer  of  the  mission  to 
England,  to  quiet  him,  of  London  and  its  buildings  and  archi- 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  697 

tecture,  of  England  and  her  people  and  her  great  men,  of  the 
many  friends  he  had  there,  "  how  sorry  he  was  to  leave  it, 
under  a  sad  sense  that  he  would  visit  it  no  more."  His  heart 
was  still  troubling  him  and  there  was  a  sadness  and  a  gentleness 
noticeable  in  his  manner  that  left  the  impression,  that  he  felt 
himself  seriously  sick  and  "  that  his  life  of  work  was  nearly 
ended."  He  did  not  rest  well  that  night;  and  the  next  day, 
rough,  unsettled  and  disagreeable,  he  went  on  to  Liverpool  to 
commence  the  homeward  voyage.  His  purpose  was  to  go  farther 
north  to  visit  the  Argylls  at  Inverary,  the  Duchess  had  written, 
urging  him  to  come,  and  the  warm  friendship  between  him  and 
her  family,  since  he  first  visited  England  and  the  wish  to  see 
them  once  more,  induced  him  strongly,  but  at  the  last,  he  felt 
he  could  not  spare  the  time. 

His  friends  urged  him  to  stay  longer  in  Europe.  William  W. 
Story  was  delighted  to  meet  and  visit  with  him  once  more.  It 
seemed  as  if  the  intervening  years  were  blotted  out  and  both 
were  young  again.  He  had  "  the  same  pleased  astonishment  at 
all  he  saw  "  and  "  the  same  stern  and  unflinching  adherence  to 
his  friends."  And  he  patronized  William  as  pleasantly  as  he 
did,  when  he  was  twenty  and  the  world  before  him,  so  that  he 
was  delighted  and  laughed  into  youth  again.  Doubtless  the 
merry  laugh  of  William  recalled  his  father's,  and  took  Sumner 
back  to  the  days  when  he  dropped  into  Judge  Story's  home,  in 
Cambridge,  so  familiarly.  Under  such  influences,  he  grew  vis 
ibly  stronger;  and  William  urged  him  to  spend  the  winter  in 
England  or  go  with  him  to  Eome  and  "wander  over  the  old 
places  ".  Once  Sumner  seemed  to  yield,  but  only  for  a  moment. 
His  answer  at  last  was  the  same  as  to  Bright  and  Governor 
Bullock,  he  must  go  back  to  the  Senate  and  to  work.  And  so 
he  went  forth,  from  the  sight  of  his  friends  beyond  the  sea 
forever.  How  much  those  friends  and  those  scenes  meant  to 
him,  warm-hearted  and  affectionate,  and  yet  without  family  and 
without  home,  and  how  much  the  thought  of  them  came  into 
his  hard,  toilsome  life,  to  ease  the  burden  and  brighten  the  way, 
can  hardly  be  told. 

The  voyage  homeward  was  a  rough  one.  For  two  days  a 
violent  gale  blew  and  the  next  the  sailors  rescued  the  crew 
of  another  ship  that  had  been  disabled.  He  landed  in  New 
York  on  the  twenty-sixth  day  of  November,  after  a  voyage  of 
twelve  days.  One  of  the  purposes  of  his  trip  had  been  to  con 
sult  Dr.  Brown-Sequard ;  but  he  had  suddenly  left  Paris  for 
New  York,  before  Sumner's  arrival.  Sumner  consulted  him 
there  upon  his  return  to  America  and  then  went  to  Wash 
ington. 


698  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

At  the  opening  of  Congress  he  was  in  his  seat,  feeling 
much  improved  in  health  by  his  trip.  The  change  of  scene  and 
the  journey  had  done  him  good.  He  felt  disappointed  at  the 
result  of  the  election.  To  those  with  whom  he  talked,  in  con 
fidence,  he  expressed  surprise.  He  could  not  understand  why 
reasons  that  seemed  so  conclusive  to  him  that  Grant  should 
not  have  been  re-elected,  had  not  been  equally  so  to  others.  He 
was  disappointed  that  his  own  speeches  against  him  had  not 
produced  a  greater  effect  upon  the  vote.  But  if  there  was  any 
feeling  of  bitterness  at  this,  there  was  no  expression  of  it.  His 
associates  in  the  Senate  remarked  it  at  the  time  and  after 
wards.  He  had  only  kind  words  for  all  of  them  and  seemed  to 
accept  the  result  as  it  was  and  wish  for  peace  and  reconciliation. 

At  the  opening  of  the  Session  it  had  been  arranged  that  a 
motion  would  be  made  to  have  the  Senate  adjourn  on  the  day 
of  the  funeral  of  Horace  Greeley,  out  of  respect  to  his  memory. 
Fenton  of  New  York  was  to  make  the  motion  and  Sumner  was 
to  second  it.  By  parliamentary  tactics,  the  Republican  major 
ity  prevented  the  motion  being  made.  In  some  remarks  that 
Sumner  prepared  for  the  occasion,  which  have  since  been  pub 
lished,  he  plead  for  reconciliation.  "  We  are  admonished  ",  he 
said  "  to  forget  the  strifes  of  party  and  to  remember  only  truth, 
country  and  mankind  *  *  *  in  other  days  the  horse  and 
armor  of  the  departed  chieftain  have  been  buried  in  the  grave, 
where  he  reposed.  So  too  may  we  bury  the  animosities  if  not 
the  badges  of  the  past." 

A  few  days  later  in  a  tribute  to  Garret  Davis,  a  Senator  from 
Kentucky,  who  had  died  during  the  recess,  Sumner  touched  the 
same  chord  again.  Davis  was  a  man  of  conspicuous  ability  and 
industry  and  of  unquestioned  integrity.  Under  circumstances 
of  peculiar  trial  he  had  been  unfaltering  in  his  devotion  to  the 
Union.  But  he  was  the  advocate  and  defender  of  slavery. 
Upon  this  subject  <(  a  certain  wild  independence  and  intensity 
of  nature,  which  made  him  unaccommodating  and  irrepres 
sible  "  came  out  so  conspicuously  that  he  yielded  neither  "  to 
argument  nor  to  the  logic  of  events  ".  He  "  spoke  last  for 
slavery".  While  paying  a  high  tribute  to  his  better  nature, 
Sumner  did  not  believe  that,  even  in  a  eulogy,  he  should  pass 
over  this  trait,  without  remark.  But  he  also  added,  in  tender 
ness  for  the  past :  "  Time  is  teacher  and  reconciler ;  nor*  is  it 
easy  for  any  candid  nature  to  preserve  a  constant  austerity  of 
judgment  towards  persons.  As  evening  approaches,  the  me 
ridian  heats  lose  their  intensity.  While  abiding  firmly  in  the 
truth  as  we  saw  it,  there  may  be  charity  and  consideration  for 
those  who  did  not  see  it  as  we  saw  it.  *  *  *  In  proportion  as 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  699 

I  quit  myself,  and  as  time  sweeps  me  far  from  our  combats,  I 
enter  without  difficulty  into  a  serene  and  pleasant  apprecia 
tion  of  ideas  and  sentiments  which  do  not  belong  to  me.  *  *  * 
Here  let  me  be  frank.  Nothing  could  make  any  speech  for 
slavery  tolerable  to  me;  but  when  I  think  how  much  opinions 
are  determined  by  the  influences  about  us,  so  that  a  change  of 
birth  and  education  might  have  made  the  Abolitionist  a  par 
tisan  of  slavery  and  the  partisan  o'f  slavery  an  Abolitionist,  I 
feel  that  while  always  unrelenting  towards  the  wrong,  we  cannot 
be  insensible  to  individual  merits." 

Sunnier  had  two  aspirations  when  he  entered  upon  the  work 
of  this  session  that  he  wished  to  see  promoted  by  legislation, — 
equal  civil  rights  for  the  blacks,  and  a  removal  of  the  animos 
ities  created  by  the  war.  He  hoped  for  a  complete  recon 
ciliation  between  the  North  and  the  South.  Both  parties  ad 
vocated  these  two  measures  in  the  late  campaign.  He  was  for 
carrying  them  out  in  good  faith. 

He  introduced  his  Civil  Eights  Bill  again.  He  also  intro 
duced  another  bill,  which  seems  unimportant  to  us,  that  could 
do  no  harm,  as  he  thought,  and  would  aid  to  restore  harmony 
between  the  sections.  But  it  was  destined  to  develop  conse 
quences  that  were  altogether  unthought  of  when  introduced. 
The  text  of  this  bill  was  as  follows : 

"  A  Bill  to  regulate  the  Army-Register  and  the  Regimental 
Colors  of  the  United  States.  Whereas  the  national  unity  and 
good  will  among  fellow-citizens  can  be  assured  only  through 
oblivion  of  past  differences  and  it  is  contrary  to  the  usage  of 
civilized  nations  to  perpetuate  the  memory  of  civil  war :  There 
fore,  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives 
of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That 
the  names  of  battles  with  fellow-citizens  shall  not  be  continued 
in  the  Army-Register,  or  placed  on  the  regimental  colors  of  the 
United  States." 

Sumner  had  twice  before  introduced  this  measure,  in  sub 
stance;  once  in  1862,  when  after  the  capture  of  Williamsburg, 
General  McClellan  asked  if  it  would  be  proper  for  regiments 
to  place  the  names  of  battles  in  which  they  were  engaged,  on 
their  regimental  colors.  Sumner  introduced  in  the  Senate  a 
resolution  that  it  would  not  and  General  Scott,  then  living, 
commended  it  as  "  noble."  Again,  in  1865  he  introduced  in  the 
Senate  a  resolution,  that  in  the  Nation's  Capitol  there  should 
be  no  picture  of  a  victory  in  battle  over  fellow-citizens;  which 
General  Robert  Anderson,  another  high  military  authority, 
commended.  There  was  no  criticism  of  Sumner's  action  or 
motives  on  either  of  these  occasions.  This  had  been  in  accord 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

with  the  practice  of  all  civilized  nations,  ancient  and  modern. 
And  the  reason  for  it  was  obvious.  No  soldier  while  fighting 
the  battles  of  his  country  should  be  reminded  by  the  flag  under 
which  he  served  of  his  previous  defeats.  It  would  neither  be 
wise  nor  generous.  Every  one  should  be  made  to  feel  him 
self  the  equal  of  all  others,  the  citizen  of  a  common  country, 
with  an  equal  pride  in  its  glory,  and  not  as  a  defeated  foe. 

In  speaking  on  this  subject,  after  Sumner's  death,  Carl 
Schurz,  himself  a  soldier  of  high  rank,  educated  in  the  military 
schools  of  Europe,  said:  "  All  civilized  governments  of  our  days 
have  instinctively  followed  the  same  dictate  of  wisdom  and 
patriotism.  The  Irishman,  when  fighting  for  old  England  at 
Waterloo,  was  not  to  behold  on  the  red  cross  floating  above  him 
the  name  of  the  Boyne.  The  Scotch  Highlander,  when  standing 
in  the  trenches  of  Sebastopol,  was  not  by  the  colors  of  his  regi 
ment  to  be  reminded  of  Culloden.  No  French  soldier  at  Aus- 
terlitz  or  Solferino  had  to  read  upon  the  tricolor  any  remi 
niscence  of  the  Vendee.  No  Hungarian  at  Sadowa  was  taunted 
by  an  Austrian  banner  with  the  surrender  of  Villages.  No 
German  regiment,  from  Saxony  or  Hanover,  charging  under 
the  iron  hail  of  Gravelotte,  was  made  to  remember,  by  words 
written  on  a  Prussian  standard,  that  the  black  eagle  had  con 
quered  them  at  Koniggratz  and  Langensalza.  Should  the  son 
of  South  Carolina,  when  at  some  future  day  defending  the 
Republic  against  some  foreign  foe,  be  reminded  by  an  inscrip 
tion  on  the  colors  floating  over  him,  that  under  this  flag  the 
gun  was  fired  that  killed  his  father  at  Gettysburg?  Should 
this  great  and  enlightened  Republic,  proud  of  standing  in  the 
front  of  human  progress,  be  less  wise,  less  large-hearted,  than 
the  ancients  were  two  thousand  years  ago  and  the  kingly  gov 
ernments  of  Europe  are  to-day  ?  " 

Sumner  thought  not.  He  believed  that  all  occasion  for  strife 
and  distrust  between  the  North  and  the  South  had  passed  away 
and  that  the  time  had  come  when  they  should  grow  together 
again  in  heart  as  they  were  indissolubly  joined  together  by 
law.  And  this  generous  impulse  quickly  found  an  answering 
response  among  the  Southern  people.  "  It  was  certainly  a 
gracious  act  toward  the  South  "  said  one  of  them, — "  though 
unhappily  it  jarred  upon  the  sensibilities  of  the  people  at  the 
other  extreme  of  the  Union  and  estranged  from  him  the  great 
body  of  his  political  friends — to  propose  to  erase  from  the  ban 
ners  of  the  national  army  the  mementoes  of  the  bloody  inter 
necine  struggle,  which  might  be  regarded  as  assailing  the  pride 
or  wounding  the  sensibilities  of  the  Southern  people.  That 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  701 

proposal  will  never  be  forgotten  by  that  people  so  long  as  the 
name  of  Charles  Sumner  lives  in  the  memory  of  man." 

But  this  act  met  a  different  reception  in  the  North.  The 
Legislature  of  Massachusetts  was  in  extra  session,  called  to 
gether  to  pass  some  bills  made  necessary  by  the  great  fire  of 
that  year,  in  Boston.  One  Hoyt,  the  member  from  Athol,  who 
had  been  a  soldier,  but  with  no  particular  army  record,  intro 
duced  a  resolution  censuring  Sumner's  bill  as  "  insulting  the 
soldiers  "  and  "  meeting  the  unqualified  condemnation  of  the 
people"  of  Massachusetts.  The  resolution  was  unexpected; 
it  came  in,  without  previous  discussion,  among  the  mem 
bers,  of  the  propriety  of  such  a  step  and  was  at  once  re 
ferred  to  a  committee.  The  committee  announced  no  public 
hearings  upon  it  and  no  one  was  heard  but  Hoyt  and  two  of  his 
friends.  The  committee  divided  upon  it,  three  members  being 
for  and  three  against  it ;  and  it  was  thus  reported.  The  Legis 
lature  was  to  adjourn  the  next  day  after  it  was  reported.  It 
was  discussed,  the  evening  it  was  reported,  and  the  next  morn 
ing.  There  was  a  good  deal  of  loose  declamation  about  insult 
ing  the  soldiers,  tearing  down  their  tombstones  and  ploughing 
up  the  National  cemeteries.  How  other  nations  had  treated  the 
question  and  the  precedents  they  had  established  was  not  dis 
cussed.  Members  were  apparently  not  familiar  with  the  sub 
ject.  What  Sumner's  motive  or  purpose  was,  in  introducing  the 
bill,  was  not  known;  an  opportunity  was  not  given  him  to 
explain. 

A  motion  was  made  to  postpone  the  resolution  indefinitely. 
It  was  supposed  to  have  carried  by  the  casting  vote  of  the 
Speaker,  but  a  recount  being  made,  it  was  found  that  the 
motion  was  lost,  by  a  majority  of  one.  The  resolution  was  then 
passed  by  the  House.  It  was  rushed  through  the  Senate,  the 
afternoon  of  the  same  day.  And  thus  was  Charles  Sumner  cen 
sured  by  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts ! 

The  fear  of  incurring  the  displeasure  of  the  soldier  vote, 
which  was  then  large,  naturally  influenced  some  Members  to 
vote  for  it.  But  there  was  a  bitter  feeling  on  the  Repub 
lican  side  towards  Sumner,  for  his  part  against  Grant. 
The  election  was  only  recently  over  and  party  feeling  at  the 
time  ran  high.  Sumner  was  treated,  on  the  impulse  of  the 
moment,  as  having  abandoned  his  principles  and  gone  over  to 
the  Democrats,  and  his  bill  as  a  Democratic  measure.  There 
was  a  disposition  to  punish  him  for  it.  And  this  feeling  more 
than  any  other  caused  its  adoption. 

But  in  every  community  there  is  a  class  of  educated  and  sober- 
minded  people,  who  are  not  to  be  blown  about  by  every  gust  of 


702  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

political  excitement.  Sumner  had  enjoyed,  in  large  measure, 
the  confidence  of  this  class  in  Massachusetts.  His  record  in  the 
Senate  had  been  a  matter  of  pride  to  them  and,  though  they 
may  have  differed  from  him  in  his  estimate  of  Grant,  they  were 
not  willing  that  he  should  be  treated  with  injustice.  A  resolu 
tion  of  censure  passed  upon  him  at  once  arrested  their  attention 
and  the  cause  was  no  sooner  known,  than  a  movement  was  or 
ganized,  headed  by  John  Greenleaf  Whittier,  the  poet,  to  have 
the  incoming  Legislature  rescind  it. 

Petitions  were  circulated  and  they  were  signed  by  more  than 
five  thousand  names.  The  number  could  have  been  increased 
indefinitely.  It  was  the  character  of  the  petitioners  that  was 
chiefly  remarkable.  Perhaps  no  prayer  to  a  Legislature  ever 
had  so  many  great  names  attached  to  it,  authors,  scholars, 
divines,  men  of  all  professions,  judges  and  statesmen,  of  the 
highest  rank  in  the  country,  Whittier,  Longfellow,  Holmes, 
Agassiz,  Wendell  Phillips,  Eev.  James  Freeman  Clarke,  Ex- 
Governor  Claflin,  Ex-Governor  Washburn,  A.  H.  Rice,  soon  to 
be  Governor,  Henry  Wilson,  Vice-President  elect,  Henry  L. 
Pierce,  the  Congressman  of  Boston,  were  some  of  those  within 
the  State ;  William  Cullen  Bryant,  Fred  Douglass,  Chief  Justice 
Chase  and  Governor  JSToyes,  of  Ohio,  were  some  of  those  without. 
A  remonstrance  was  also  presented. 

The  Legislature  met  in  January,  1873.  The  petitions  were 
referred  to  the  Committee  on  Federal  Relations,  which  gave 
public  hearings  to  both  sides.  Ex-Governor  Claflin,  Ex-Gov 
ernor  Washburn,  Rev.  James  Freeman  Clarke  and  Hon.  Edward 
L.  Pierce  argued  the  question  for  the  petitioners;  Hoyt,  the 
mover  of  this  resolution,  William  Lloyd  Garrison  and  Julia 
Ward  Howe,  appeared  and  spoke  for  the  remonstrants.  Since 
the  days  of  his  young  manhood,  Sumner  had  known  the  last 
two.  Garrison's  paper,  the  Liberator,  was  the  first  for  which 
he  subscribed;  and  since  1835  he  had  continued  his  sup 
port  to  it  and  its  editor.  But  as  the  tide  of  years  rolled  back 
and  he  saw  the  visits  in  those  early  days  to  New  York  and  the 
home  of  the  Misses  Ward,  the  "  Three  Graces  of  Bond  Street ", 
where  he  entered  with  a  young  man's  enthusiasm  into  the 
charmed  circle  of  their  wit  and  beauty,  and  recalled  once  more 
the  tender  sentiment  of  the  past,  it  must  have  chafed  him  to  see 
the  last  of  the  "  lovely  triumvirate  "  in  this  company. 

The  committee  reported  against  rescinding  the  resolution 
and  both  Houses  voted  to  adopt  their  report.  The  strength 
of  the  election  prejudice  was  still  too  strong. 

The  resolution  of  censure  came  upon  Sumner  with  prostrat 
ing  effect,  "  Only  the  sea  and  tiger,"  he  wrote  Rev.  James  Free- 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  703 

man  Clarke,  who  had  promptly  criticised  in  his  pulpit  the 
resolution  of  the  Legislature  and  defended  Sumner's  bill,  "  are 
as  blind  and  senseless,  in  ferocity,  as  party  hate."  He  was  now 
without  party  lines  in  the  Senate.  He  was  not  a  Democrat — 
never  had  been ;  and  the  call  for  the  Eepublican  caucus  limited 
its  membership  to  those  who  had  supported  Grant  and  the  plat 
form.  Hostility  seemed  to  be  directed  at  him.  Schurz  was 
given  a  place  on  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  by  the 
Democrats,  and  Banks  was  allowed  to  retain  his  Committee 
appointment,  by  the  Republicans  in  the  House.  Both  had  been 
prominent  in  the  movement  for  Greeley.  Cut  off  thus  in  Wash 
ington  and  censured  at  home,  avoided  by  many  he  had  for 
merly  led,  Sumner's  position  was  unpleasant.  It  preyed  upon 
his  mind. 

He  was  in  no  physical  condition  to  withstand  it.  All  the 
improvement  he  had  gained  by  his  trip  to  Europe  disappeared 
and  the  heart  and  brain  troubles  returned,  in  aggravated  forms. 
He  became  seriously  sick.  The  attacks  of  angina  pectoris  be 
came  so  frequent  as  to  average  one  each  week  and  increased  in 
length  and  intensity.  There  was  the  pressure  on  the  brain  at 
tended  with  pains  about  the  spine,  neck  and  shoulders.  His 
physician,  Dr.  J.  T.  Johnson,  of  Washington,  attended  him 
twice  each  day;  and  besides,  daily  reports  were  made  to  Dr. 
Brown-Sequard,  in  New  York,  and  his  advice  received  as  to 
treatment.  He  could  walk  with  difficulty,  leaning  upon  a  cane, 
in  the  house ;  it  pained  him  to  sit  and  he  was  finally  obliged  to 
take  his  bed. 

He  read  some  and  was  glad  to  see  friends  who  called ;  their 
talk  generally  led  to  his  recent  trip  to  Europe,  and  the  persons 
and  places  he  visited.  It  withdrew  his  thoughts  from  politics. 
But  to  a  few,  those  nearest  to  him,  as  Schurz  and  Wilson,  he 
revealed  his  deep  disappointment,  at  the  storm  of  obloquy  that 
his  Battle  Flag  Bill  had  raised  in  Massachusetts.  The  days  of 
that  winter  sat  sad  and  dark  upon  him.  He  was  obliged  to 
give  up  all  work,  even  that  upon  his  "  book  ",  as  he  called  the 
collected  edition  of  his  speeches,  which  he  was  publishing  and 
longed  to  see  completed.  His  life,  filled  with  work  and  political 
struggle  and  strife,  had  not  been  a  peculiarly  happy  one  and 
sometimes  he  longed  for  a  home  with  a  little  less  friction  in  it. 
"  If  my  works  were  completed  and  my  Civil  Rights  Bill  passed/' 
he  said  one  day  to  Wilson  as  they  sat  alone,  "  no  visitor  could 
enter  that  door  that  would  be  more  welcome  than  death."  For 
these  causes  he  would  ask  strength  again ;  and  now  a  new  wish 
had  come,  to  appear  in  the  Senate  once  more,  and  defend  his 
Battle  Flag  Bill.  He  felt  that  he  had  been  misunderstood, 


704  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  unjustly  condemned.  Massachusetts,  he  said,  had  led  in 
the  battle  for  freedom  and  equality ;  and  he  wished  to  see  her 
lead  again,  "  in  smoothing  the  wrinkled  front  of  war  ".  He 
wrote  to  Wilson  asking  that  the  consideration  of  his  bill  be 
postponed  until  he  would  be  able  to  be  present ;  and  his  request 
was  granted. 

From  the  nineteenth  day  of  December  until  the  middle  of 
March  he  was  not  in  the  Senate.  He  went  there  at  that  time  to 
present,  according  to  custom,  the  credentials  of  his  colleague, 
Geo.  S.  Boutwell,  who  had  been  elected  to  succeed  Wilson,  now 
the  Vice-President.  When  Sunnier  advanced  with  Boutwell 
to  the  Speaker's  chair,  where  the  oath  was  administered,  he 
appeared  weak  and  sick,  leaning  heavily  upon  his  cane.  And  he 
was  not  able  to  attend  the  meetings  of  the  Senate  again  that 
session.  With  the  coming  of  spring  and  the  bright  and  beauti 
ful  days,  with  warm  sunshine  and  pleasant  air,  which  wake  trees 
and  flowers  and  birds  to  such  joyous  life  in  that  climate,  a  new 
vigor  seemed  to  be  infused  into  him.  He  commenced,  by  taking 
short  walks  or  drives  and  increasing  their  length.  On  the  first 
of  May  he  attended  the  wedding  of  his  physician  and  called  on 
Chief  Justice  Chase.  The  talk  with  Chase  of  old  friends,  old 
scenes  and  old  conflicts  was  "  intimate  and  affectionate  ".  Six 
days  later  Chase  died,  very  suddenly,  in  New  York,  and  Sum- 
ner  was  asked  to  be  one  of  the  pallbearers,  but  was  obliged  to 
decline.  Two  weeks  later,  he  was  able  to  do  a  little  work  on  his 
"  book ".  Gradually  health  and  strength,  in  a  measure,  re 
turned  and  by  the  last  of  July  the  physicians  and  medicines 
disappeared. 


CHAPTER  XLIII 

RETURN  TO  WORK — LAST  SUMMER  AT  BOSTON — IN  SENATE  AGAIN 

ATTENDS    DINNER    OF    NEW    ENGLAND    SOCIETY    OF    NEW 

YORK LAST    DAYS DEATH EULOGIES. 

SUMNER  remained  in  Washington  till  the  last  days  of  July, 
at  work  upon  his  "  book  ".  This  required  frequent  visits  to  the 
Congressional  Library.  It  was  quiet,  congenial  employment 
for  him  and  took  his  mind  from  politics  and  excitement.  This 
was  what  he  needed.  While  his  general  health  had  become  fair, 
he  found  he  could  not  stand  excitement  and  therefore  avoided 
politics  even  in  conversation.  His  friends  urged  him  to  make 
another  trip  to  Europe,  but  he  would  not  listen  to  this.  In  the 
purchase  of  rare  books  and  manuscripts  and  art  treasures, 
while  there  the  summer  before,  he  had  expended  about  six  thou 
sand  dollars.  The  most  of  this  he  had  borrowed ;  for  the  modest 
fortune,  inherited  mostly  at  his  mother's  death,  he  kept  invested 
as  a  permanent  capital,  upon  which  he  did  not  wish  to  draw. 
He  was  always  restive  when  in  debt.  He  now  hoped  by  lectur 
ing,  the  coming  fall,  to  earn  the  money  to  pay  this  off  and  be 
free  again. 

When  pressed  to  go  to  Europe,  he  wrote :  "  I  am  yet  in  debt 
for  my  European  trip  last  autumn,  and  no  temptation  can 
make  me  repeat  this  indiscretion,  and  reduce  still  more  my 
small  capital.  Evidently  you  do  not  consider  my  expenses, — 
my  house,  clerk  hire  here — salary  to  proof  readers  at  Cam 
bridge,  my  doctor's  bills  (two  visits  daily  for  months),  with 
Dr.  Brown-Sequard's  account;  also  poor  relations.  How  to 
meet  these,  even  with  my  increased  pay,  I  know  not." 

Sumner  had  partly  made  arrangements  with  Redpath's 
bureau  for  engagements  to  lecture,  when  his  friends  discovered 
it.  The  subject  he  had  chosen  was  the  "  The  Unity  of  the 
Republic  " ;  and  he  had  done  some  work  upon  his  lecture.  His 
physician,  DT.  Brown- Sequard  thought  he  was  equal  to  the 
strain.  But  his  friends  thought  differently  and  urgently  ad 
vised  against  it.  He  admitted  he  needed  "rest  and  play 
and  friendship  "  and  regretfully  undertook  the  work.  Wendell 
Phillips,  who  had  been  an  extensive  lecturer  and  was  familiar 
with  the  hardships  of  the  work,  was  especially  active  in  dis- 

705 


706  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

suading  from  it.  Seeing  that  the  debt  was  the  worrying  cause, 
he  procured  Henry  L.  Pierce  to  pay  it  and  take  Suiiiner's  note 
for  the  amount.  The  engagement  to  lecture  was  then  reluc 
tantly  cancelled.  Sumner  would  rather  have  had  the  debt  paid. 

This  note  was  afterwards  paid  out  of  Sumner's  estate.  The 
various  reports  that  money  was  raised  among  his  friends,  as 
for  instance,  to  pay  the  expenses  of  his  last  trip  to  Europe,  to 
pay  this  debt,  and  so  forth,  are  without  foundation.  Sumner 
was  exceedingly  sensitive  upon  such  matters  and  would  not 
allow  favors  of  this  kind  to  be  shown  him.  He  even  declined 
the  offer  from  the  steamship  company,  of  a  free  passage  home 
ward,  on  his  last  European  trip.  His  sensitiveness  about  receiv 
ing  gifts  has  already  been.noticed.  He  believed  that  the  receipt 
of  such  favors  was  not  consistent  with  a  public  man's  position. 
In  the  life  of  Daniel  Webster,  he  had  seen  these  gratuities  give 
rise  to  ugly  scandals  and  rude  questionings,  unworthy  of  the 
man  and  his  position,  as  well  as  embarrassing  to  his  friends. 

Sumner  spent  the  time  quietly,  during  this  summer,  with  his 
friends  and  occasionally  working  at  his  book ;  otherwise  under 
taking  no  serious  employment,  but  keeping  in  mind  his  purpose 
to  re-establish  his  health.  "  It  is  pleasant,"  he  wrote,  "  to  feel 
a  sense  of  health,  to  sleep  without  narcotics  and  to  move  about, 
as  other  people,  without  effort  or  ache."  Mrs.  John  T.  Sargent 
invited  him  to  make  her  house  his  home  during  his  stay  in 
Massachusetts ;  but  he  declined.  "  The  large  airy  room  in  the 
large  house  "  was  tempting,  but  he  felt  he  needed  retirement 
and  went  to  his  old  quarters  at  the  Coolidge  House,  where  he 
would  feel  less  restraint.  He  spent  his  summer  there,  and  at 
Nahant,  where  he  was  the  guest  of  Longfellow  and  Mrs.  George 
A.  James,  at  both  of  whose  houses  he  was  always  welcome  and 
was  treated  almost  as  one  of  the  family.  One  day  in  Septem 
ber  he  and  Longfellow  drove  to  Amesbury  and  visited  Whittier, 
on  their  return,  dining  with  Ben  Perley  Poore  at  Newbury. 
He  also  visited  Ex-Governor  Claflin  at  Newtonville  and  Mr. 
Hooper  at  Cotuit,  spending  two  or  three  days  with  each. 

While  visiting  Longfellow  at  Nahant,  Sumner  had  a  call 
from  Vice-President  Wilson,  his  former  colleague  in  the  Senate, 
whose  friendship,  notwithstanding  differences  of  political 
opinion,  still  continued  unbroken.  Wilson  had  suffered  a  stroke 
of  paralysis  the  previous  spring,  which  had  partially  disabled 
him.  Each  was  struggling  on  with  shattered  health,  filling  a 
high  office,  under  the  penalty  of  public  life,  that  he  could  not 
escape  observation  and  attention  wherever  he  went,  and  having 
besides  an  unfinished  book  on  his  hands,  by  which  he  hoped  to 
continue  his  name  to  posterity.  It  is  a  sad  reflection  on  the 


LIFE  OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  707 

uncertain  fame  of  American  statesmen  that  Sumner  and  Wilson 
after  spending  twenty  years  of  hard  service  in  one  of  the  highest 
offices  of  the  Nation,  where  the  best  of  life  was  exacted  and 
given,  must  thus  confess  at  its  close  the  uncertainty  of  its 
rewards.  Each  was  obliged  by  death  to  leave  his  book  to  be 
completed  by  others. 

George  S.  Hillard,  another  of  Sumner's  friends,  had  also 
suffered  a  stroke  of  paralysis.  Sumner  saw  him  repeatedly 
during  this  summer  vacation  and  together  they  enjoyed  their 
talks  of  the  old  days,  of  "  The  Five  of  Clubs,'  of  the  members 
long  gone,  the  refined  and  sensitive  Cleveland;  and  Felton,  so 
lovable,  whose  merry  laugh  came  back  from  the  past  so  tenderly ; 
of  "  Number  Four,  Court  Street "  and  their  old  law  office,  with 
its  visitors.  The  separation  later,  caused  by  Sumner's  fight 
against  slavery,  was  forgotten ;  and  Hillard  now  agreed  that  he 
had  not  seen  into  the  future  so  clearly.  Sumner  dined  with 
Hillard,  one  evening  shortly  before  his  return  to  Washington. 
The  domestics  of  the  house  were  colored  and  one  had  been  a 
slave  and  bore  on  her  back  the  marks  of  her  master's  lash.  They 
were  much  elated  at  the  thought  of  preparing  a  dinner  for 
Charles  Sumner.  Upon  being  told  of  their  admiration,  Sumner 
answered  that  it  was  customary,  in  certain  places,  when  the  din 
ner  was  unusually  fine,  to  send  a  glass  of  wine  to  the  cook  and 
asked  that  he  might  be  permitted  to  do  so  on  this  occasion ;  and 
it  was  done.  At  the  close  of  the  meal  the  domestics  wished  to 
be  permitted  to  see  Sumner  and  he  smilingly  complied  with  the 
request.  It  was  a  scene  worthy  the  brush  of  an  artist;  Sum- 
ner's  stalwart  form,  six  feet  three  inches  tall,  filling  the  door 
way  to  the  kitchen,  while  those  poor  colored  women,  as  if  it 
were  enough  to  touch  the  hem  of  his  garment,  came  forward  to 
take  his  hand  and  press  it  to  their  lips.  Some  of  the  by 
standers  could  not  suppress  a  tear ;  but  it  was  so  unexpected  to 
Sumner,  that  he  soon  escaped  in  embarrassment. 

This  was  an  unusually  happy  summer  for  Sumner.  He  felt 
the  sympathy  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts  coming  back  to 
him,  in  love  and  confidence,  as  of  old.  His  sickness  and  the  fear 
that  perhaps  he  might  not  recover  had  touched  them  with  a 
sense  of  the  injustice  done  him  in  the  recent  days.  Old  friends 
came  forward  to  greet  him  and  new  people  sought  to  make  his 
acquaintance.  They  were  glad  to  see  him  looking  so  well.  He 
confessed  he  had  not  felt  so  well  for  several  years.  The  color  in 
his  face  was  unusually  clear  and  good;  and  he  walked  with 
comparative  ease.  He  greeted  those  he  met  cordially  and 
seemed  to  appreciate  the  warm  welcome  he  received.  On  every 
side  there  was  talk  of  him  for  another  term  in  the  Senate  and 


708  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

no  serious  mention  of  any  other  name,  though  the  choice  was 
soon  to  be  made.  He  was  entertained  as  principal  guest  at  four 
of  the  clubs  in  Boston,  making  a  short  speech  on  each  occasion, 
but  avoiding  politics,  choosing  such  subjects  as  love  of  country, 
the  future  of  the  Republic,  or  the  Centennial  Celebration  and 
the  return  to  specie  payments,  questions  then  only  being 
mooted.  He  appeared  at  lectures  several  times,  at  one  he  pre 
sided  and,  at  another,  came  forward,  at  the  close,  to  decline  the 
call  of  the  audience  for  him.  He  spoke  at  a  meeting  at  the 
Merchants'  Exchange,  called  to  solicit  aid  for  the  sufferers  from 
yellow  fever  at  Memphis  and  Shreveport.  He  was  made  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  a  place  then  much 
coveted  by  scholars.  He  attended  a  social  meeting  at  Rev. 
James  Freeman  Clarke's  church  by  invitation  of  the  pastor. 
On  the  way  he  inquired  of  a  passenger  on  the  street  car  for  the 
location  of  the  church.  After  answering,  the  passenger  inquired 
if  he  was  a  stranger  in  the  city.  But  a  little  boy  on  the  same 
car  jumped  off,  when  Sumner  alighted,  to  ask  him  to  write  his 
name  in  an  autograph  album,  which  he  did,  by  the  light  of  a 
street  lamp.  At  the  church  he  spoke  briefly,  directing  his  re 
marks  to  the  young  folks,  speaking  of  the  possibilities  of  the 
future  and  expressing  the  wish  that  he  could  live  in  the  com 
ing  generation.  But  a  lady  present  reminded  him  later  in  the 
evening  that,  "the  Lord  knew  better  than  he  did  when  he 
ought  to  have  been  born/'  He  was  entertained  by  many  of  his 
friends  and  entered  heartily  into  the  occasions,  both  he  and 
they  seeming  happy  at  his  prospect  of  continued  good  health. 

He  left  Boston  for  Washington  November  twenty-fourth,, 
1873,  stopping  off  a  few  hours,  in  the  afternoon,  to  attend  a 
public  reception,  given  in  his  honor,  by  the  citizens  of  Spring 
field  and  then  went  on;  and  the  people  of  Massachusetts  saw 
him  no  more.  But  it  was  not  a  parting  in  sadness  and  disap 
pointment.  His  friend,  Edward  L.  Pierce,  accompanied  him 
on  the  train  from  Boston,  and  once  interrupted  his  reading  to 
ask :  "  Do  you  not  see  how  the  heart  of  Massachusetts  is  with 
you  ?  "  "  Yes/'  after  a  moment's  hesitation,  he  answered,  "  I 
expected  it,  but  not  so  soon."  He  realized  then  that  the  resolu 
tion  of  censure  would  be  rescinded,  at  the  coming  meeting  of 
the  Legislature,  and  that  for  the  fifth  time,  if  he  consented, 
he  would  be  chosen  to  represent  the  State  in  the  Senate.  After 
brief  stops  at  New  York  and  Philadelphia  he  reached  Wash 
ington  on  November  twenty-eighth. 

Sumner  was  present  in  the  Senate  at  the  opening  of  Congress. 
The  disposition  here  as  in  Boston  had  been  changed  by  his 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER  709 

illness  and  absence  from  the  Senate.  His  colleagues  gener 
ally  were  glad  to  welcome  him  back  and  to  congratulate  him 
upon  his  return  to  health.  But  there  was  still  a  lack  of  cordial 
ity,  on  the  part  of  those  who  were  peculiarly  of  the  Administra 
tion  circle,  Conkling,  Logan,  Morton  and  Carpenter.  They, 
with  the  aid  of  patronage,  were  now  the  controlling  set  in  the 
Senate.  They  classed  him  as  a  Democrat  and  refused  him  any 
place  of  consequence  on  the  Committees.  He  knew  the  classifi 
cation  was  not  correct,  as  they  did,  but  he  made  no  complaint. 

Sumner  this  year  attended  the  annual  dinner  of  the  New 
England  Society  of  New  York,  held  on  the  evening  of  the 
twenty-second  of  December.  He  had  been  pressed  to  go 
before,  but  declined,  because  of  his  rule  not  to  leave  Washing 
ton,  when  Congress  was  in  session,  except  in  case  of  urgent 
necessity.  He  felt  that  he  could  now  claim  some  relaxation 
of  this  rule.  The  President  of  the  Society  was  his  friend, 
Elliot  C.  Cowdin,  who  had  shown  him  so  much  kindness  on 
his  last  visit  to  Paris.  Sumner  was  to  be  his  guest  while  in 
New  York  and  thus  renew  his  pleasant  acquaintance  with 
"  little  Alice  "  and  the  rest  of  the  family,  and  talk  over  their 
European  days. 

In  responding  to  the  toast,  "  The  Senate  of  the  United 
States  ",  he  made  a  graceful  reference  to  his  friendship  with 
Mr.  Cowdin,  "  of  many  years,  in  Boston,  New  York  and  in  a 
foreign  land."  This  speech — his  last  before  a  general  audience 
— his  last  except  some  impromptu  remarks  in  the  Senate,  re 
vealed  some  of  the  principles  which  guided  his  life.  He  re 
ferred  to  the  counsel  of  the  venerable  pastor,  John  Eobin- 
son,  to  the  Pilgrims,  before  their  embarkation  at  Delft-Haven ; 
"  to  be  as  ready  to  receive  the  truth,  at  the  hands  of  other  min 
isters,  as  ever  they  had  been  at  his,  not  to  close  their  souls  to  the 
truth  as  the  Lutherans,  who  could  not  be  drawn  to  go  beyond 
what  Luther  saw"  nor  as  the  Calvinists,  "who  stuck  where 
Calvin  left  them,"  "  though  they  were  precious,  shining  lights 
in  their  times,  yet  God  had  not  revealed  His  whole  will  to 
them,"  and  he  was  "  very  confident  the  Lord  had  more  truth 
and  light  yet,  to  break  forth  out  of  His  Holy  Word."  This, 
Sumner  insisted,  recognized  the  law  of  Human  Progress, 
"which  teaches  the  sure  advance  of  the  human  family,  and 
opens  the  vista  of  the  ever  broadening,  never  ending  future 
on  earth." 

He  spoke  of  the  poverty  of  the  Pilgrims,  their  whole  outfit, 
including  £1,700  of  trading-stock,  being  only  £2,400,  and 
humorously  told  of  their  soldier  captain,  Miles  Standish,  being 
sent  to  England  to  borrow,  and  was  only  able  to  raise  £150,  at 


710  LIFE  OP  CHARLES  SUMNER 

fifty  per  cent  interest.  "  So  much/'  he  said,  with  a  reference 
to  General  Sherman,  who  was  present,  "  for  a  valiant  soldier 
on  a  financial  expedition/7  "  And  yet/'  he  said,  "  this  embarka 
tion  so  slender  in  numbers  and  means  is  illustrious  beyond  the 
lot  of  men/' 

"  Though  this  was  little  foreseen,"  he  said,  "  in  their  day,  it 
is  plain  now  how  it  has  come  to  pass.  The  highest  greatness, 
surviving  time  and  storm,  is  that  which  proceeds  from  the 
soul  of  man.  Monarchs  and  cabinets,  generals  and  admirals, 
with  the  pomp  of  courts  and  the  circumstance  of  war,  in  the 
gradual  lapse  of  time  disappear  from  sight;  but  the  pioneers 
of  Truth,  though  poor  and  lowly,  especially  those  whose  ex 
ample  elevates  human  nature  and  teaches  the  rights  of  man  so 
that  Government  of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the 
people  shall  not  perish  from  the  earth — such  harbingers  can 
never  be  forgotten,  and  their  renown  spreads,  coextensive  with 
the  cause  they  served." 

He  contrasted  the  rulers  of  that  time,  "  the  foolish  James  " 
of  England  "  the  morose  Louis  the  Thirteenth "  of  France, 
"  the  imbecile  Philip  the  Third  "  of  Spain,  "  the  persecuting 
Ferdinand  the  Second "  of  Germany,  Pope  Paul  the  Fifth, 
Christian  of  Denmark  and  his  son  Christian  of  Norway, 
Gustavus  Adolphus  of  Sweden  and  a  score  of  others  whom  he 
named,  all  so  well  known  then  and  whose  faces  have  been  so 
carefully  preserved  by  Art,  with  these  poor  Pilgrims  who  had 
no  artists  and  whose  countenances  are  now  unknown.  None  of 
the  former,  he  declared,  excepting  Gustavus  Adolphus  "  because 
he  revealed  a  superior  character  ",  is  now  remembered,  "  but 
with  indifference  or  contempt.  While  our  Pilgrims  had  in 
themselves  that  inborn  virtue  which  was  more  than  all  else 
besides,  and  their  landing  was  an  epoch."  "  The  former,"  he 
added,  "  are  ascending  into  the  firmament,  there  to  shine  for 
ever,  while  the  latter  have  been  long  dropping  into  the  dark 
ness  of  oblivion,  to  be  brought  forth  only  to  point  a  moral  or  to 
illustrate  the  fame  of  contemporaries  whom  they  regarded  not. 
Do  I  err  in  supposing  this  an  illustration  of  the  supremacy 
which  belongs  to  the  triumphs  of  the  moral  nature?" 

"I  would  if  I  could,"  he  said,  "make  their  example  a  uni 
versal  lesson,  and  stamp  it  upon  the  land.  The  conscience 
which  directed  them  should  be  the  guide  of  our  public  council ; 
the  just  and  equal  laws  which  they  required  should  be  ordained 
by  us;  and  the  hospitality  to  Truth  which  was  their  rule  should 
be  ours.  Nor  would  I  forget  their  courage  and  steadfastness. 
Had  they  turned  back  or  wavered,  I  know  not  what  would 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  711 

have  been  the  record  of  this  continent,  but  I  can  see  clearly  that 
a  great  example  would  have  been  lost." 

This  speech,  though  his  last,  shows  no  diminution  of  his 
mental  powers.  Since  his  death  it  has  been  selected  and  pub 
lished  as  one  of  the  choice  specimens  of  American  eloquence. 

Sumner's  reception  at  this  banquet  gave  unmistakable  evi 
dence  of  the  high  place  he  held  in  New  York.  Owing  to  a  de 
lay  of  his  train,  he  was  late  in  arriving  at  the  banquet.  As  he 
passed  up  the  hall,  to  the  place  assigned  him,  as  principal  guest, 
at  the  right  of  the  President,  he  was  recognized  and  heartily 
cheered.  He  was  introduced  by  the  President  as  ". the  senior 
in  consecutive  service  and  the  most  eminent  member  of  the 
Senate,  whose  early,  varied  and  distinguished  services  in  the 
cause  of  Freedom  had  made  his  name  a  household  word  through 
out  the  world."  On  rising  he  was  received  with  great  cheering, 
the  members  of  the  Society  standing.  Many  times  during  his 
speech  he  was  interrupted  by  applause  and  at  the  conclusion 
the  audience  rose  and  gave  cheer  upon  cheer.  It  was  a  re 
ception  altogether  worthy  of  the  man  and  his  work  and  it 
touched  him  deeply.  For  weeks  after,  the  effect  of  it  was 
noticeable  upon  his  spirits.  It  was  an  earnest  of  the  assured 
place  he  was  to  hold  in  the  estimation  of  posterity. 

Sumner  remained  four  days  in  New  York,  enjoying  the 
hospitality  of  Mr.  Cowdin  and  his  family.  While  there  he  was 
seized  with  a  cold,  which,  with  the  excitement  and  physical 
strain  incident  to  his  visit,  caused  some  unfavorable  symptoms, 
but  the  kindly  anxiety  of  Mr.  Cowdin  and  his  family  quickly 
came  out  in  the  unfailing  tenderness  of  husband  and  wife  and 
children.  Did  Sumner  not  secretly  wish  he  could  have  such 
tenderness  with  him  always,  have  wife  and  children  of  his 
own,  to  offer  kindly  ministrations  in  sickness  and  when  others 
met  him  with  averted  faces,  to  welcome  him  to  their  circle  and 
say  they  knew  that  he  was  great  and  pure  and  good? 

On  December,  twenty-sixth,  he  was  back  in  Washington  and 
at  work.  To  one  who  wrote  to  him  cautioning  him  about  his 
health,  he  answered  cheerily.  "  I  note  and  value  your  warning. 
My  case  is  less  menacing  than  the  Vice-President's.  I  have 
latterly  done  my  eleven  hours  work  a  day." 

At  the  opening  of  the  session  he  introduced  his  Civil  Rights 
Bill  again.  On  the  second  day  of  the  session  he  moved  the 
Senate  to  proceed  to  the  consideration  of  it.  But  Senator 
Ferry  of  Connecticut  objected  that  Edmunds  of  Vermont  had 
asked,  that  it  be  referred  to  his  committee,  and  added  that  he 
was  not  now  present  and  that  a  recent  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  had  increased  the  doubt  of  the  constitutionality  of  the 


71#  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

bill.  There  was  a  discussion  of  the  reference,  Sumner  objecting 
and  insisting  that  it  be  disposed  of  promptly.  But  his  mo 
tion  did  not  carry.  On  the  twenty-seventh  day  of  January 
1874,  the  bill  came  up  again,  on  a  motion  to  refer  it  to  the 
Judiciary  Committee.  Sumner  resisted  the  motion  and  argued 
that  the  bill  had  already  been  twice  before  this  Committee  and 
had  each  time  been  reported  adversely,  after  being  held  there 
many  months,  that  the  third  time  he  had  introduced  it,  he  did 
not  ask  a  reference  on  this  account,  that  in  his  opinion  to  refer 
it  now  only  meant  delay  and  he  was  for  action.  But  members 
of  the  Committee  assured  him  that  it  should  be  promptly  re 
ported  and  he  then  withdrew  his  objection  and  it  was  referred. 

This  was  Sumner's  last  effort  for  the  passage  of  a  bill,  on 
which  he  had  labored  four  years.  By  his  agitation,  there  had 
grown  up  a  feeling  in  its  favor.  Each  political  party  had  ad 
mitted  its  justness  and  the  Senate  was  inclined  in  its  favor. 
Though  later  it  was  passed,  it  was  afterwards  held  unconstitu 
tional  by  the  Supreme  Court,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  legis 
lation  that  belonged  to  the  States.  Its  provisions  have  since 
been  enacted  in  many  of  them. 

Sumner's  interest  in  the  attitude  of  the  Supreme  Court  to 
wards  his  Civil  Rights  Bill  influenced  his  action  upon  the  ap 
pointment  of  a  Chief  Justice  at  this  session.  The  President 
first  nominated  Roscoe  Conkling,  but  he  declined,  then  Wil 
liams  of  Oregon,  but  it  became  apparent  that  his  appointment 
could  not  be  confirmed.  After  some  hesitation,  his  name  was 
withdrawn,  by  the  President.  He  then  sent  to  the  Senate  the 
name  of  Caleb  Gushing,  of  Massachusetts.  Of  his  ability,  there 
could  be  no  question,  but  his  practice  as  an  attorney  had  not 
been  extensive.  His  life  had  been  spent  largely  as  a  politician 
and  in  dealing  with  public  questions.  His  instability  as  a 
politician  was  well  known.  He  had  been  a  Whig,  a  Democrat 
and  a  Republican  and  an  ultra  man  in  each  relation.  He  was 
a  Member  of  the  Massachusetts  House  of  Representatives  at  tha 
time  of  Sumner's  first  election  to  the  Senate  and  the  leader  of 
the  opposition  to  him.  He  was  the  Chairman  of  the  Demo 
cratic  Convention  which  met  at  Charleston  in  1860.  At  the 
outbreak  of  the  war,  he  publicly  spoke  and  wrote  in  favor  of  the 
right  of  Secession.  During  the  war  he  became  a  Republican. 
His  nomination  was  much  of  a  surprise  in  Massachusetts. 

Sumner  determined  to  support  it.  Gushing  had  a  country 
home  near  Washington  and  an  intimacy  had  grown  up  between 
them,  Sumner  frequently  driving  out  to  his  house  during  the 
pleasant  days  of  the  preceding  spring,  when  he  was  convales 
cing.  Their  talks  had  been  cordial  and  the  constitutionality  of 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  Civil  Eights  Bill  had  been  one  of  their  subjects.  Gushing 
agreed  with  Sumner  upon  it.  Owing  to  their  friendship,  Cush- 
ing's  ability  and  their  agreement  on  this  question,  in  which 
Sumner  took  a  deep  interest,  he  determined  to  support  the  nom 
ination,  though  many  of  his  Massachusetts  friends  advised 
against  it.  His  name,  however,  was  afterwards  withdrawn,  by 
the  President,  at  the  request  of  the  Republican  caucus,  of  which 
Sumner  was  not  a  member,  owing  to  Cushing's  record  at  the 
opening  of  the  war  and  particularly  on  account  of  a  letter 
which  then  came  to  light,  asking  the  good  offices  of  Jefferson 
Davis  in  favor  of  a  clerk  about  to  join  the  Confederacy. 

A  letter  written  by  Sumner  about  this  appointment  reveals 
his  fidelity,  to  his  friends  as  well  as  to  his  measures :  "  I  trust 
Gushing  absolutely,"  he  wrote,  "  and  believe,  if  the  occasion 
had  occurred,  he  would  have  vindicated  our  ideas  judicially  far 
better  than  any  probable  nominee  of  Grant.  I  do  not  write 
in  the  dark,  for  I  have  talked  with  him  on  these  questions  and 
have  seen  his  sympathy  with  me.  You  know  that  I  do  not 
cherish  old  differences  and  animosities.  How  many  have  I 
seen  advanced  to  the  front  who  were  once  bitterly  the  other 
way!  Knowing  Gushing  as  I  did,  would  it  not  have  been 
mean  and  craven  for  me  to  turn  against  him  or  to  skulk  in 
silence?  This  is  not  my  way  with  friends.  Such  is  not  my 
idea  of  friendship." 

Morrison  R.  Waite  was  afterwards  appointed  and  confirmed. 
Sumner  did  not  vote  on  the  question  of  his  confirmation.  When 
it  was  being  considered  by  the  Senate  in  executive  session,  he 
spoke  at  length  of  the  importance  of  the  office  and  the  character 
of  man  required  and  of  his  association  with  those  who  had 
filled  it  and  of  the  great  judges  he  had  known.  The  session 
being  secret  his  remarks  were  never  printed,  but  they  were 
commended  by  those  who  heard  them.  The  appointee  was 
then  comparatively  unknown  in  Washington,  as  was  his  opinion 
upon  the  question  in  which  Sumner  felt  so  much  interest.  The 
result  justified  Sumner's  apprehension,  for  Chief  Justice  Waite 
concurred  in  the  opinion  holding  the  Civil  Rights  Law  uncon 
stitutional. 

On  Friday,  March  sixth,  Sumner  spoke  in  the  Senate  on  the 
bill  for  the  Centennial  Exposition  to  be  held  in  Philadelphia 
in  1876.  From  the  beginning  he  had  taken  much  interest  in 
it.  He  was  not  in  favor  of  giving  it  the  form  of  a  World's 
Fair,  believing  that  coming  so  soon  after  the  Exposition  at 
Vienna  it  would  not  be  a  success.  But  he  was  in  favor  of  a 
National  Exposition  showing  the  progress  of  this  country  in  the 
arts  and  sciences.  In  his  debate,  on  this  day,  there  was  a  sharp 


714  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

though  friendly  encounter  between  him  and  the  Pennsylvania 
Senators.  He  favored  a  farther  consideration  of  the  bill  and 
moved  a  reference  of  it  to  a  committee;  and  he  prevailed. 
These  were  his  last  remarks  in  the  Senate. 

He  was  pleased  with  the  vote  and  just  after  it  was  taken  he 
said  to  a  fellow  Senator :  "  Thurman,  this  is  another  instance 
of  the  good  effects  of  debate.  Had  the  vote  been  taken  on  the 
bill  without  discussion,  it  would  have  passed  almost  unani 
mously."  Sumner  never  limited  his  friendships  to  those  of 
his  own  party.  His  friendship  with  Thurman,  though  a 
Democrat,  approached  intimacy  and,  he  said  after  Sumner's 
death,  it  was  never  marred  for  a  moment  by  any  political 
difference,  however  great  and  decided.  Thurman  thought  one 
of  Sumner's  distinguishing  traits  was  his  love  of  discussion. 

"  He  never,"  he  said,  "  within  my  knowledge  shrunk  from 
it;  and  he  was  the  determined  opponent  of  all  attempts  to 
limit  debate  in  the  Senate  by  a  previous  question  or  other 
restrictive  rule.  He  spoke  often  and  elaborately  himself,  and 
he  was  the  best,  and  perhaps  the  most  courteous,  listener  among 
us  to  the  speeches  of  others.  He  placed  a  very  high  estimate 
upon  the  power  and  effect  of  discussion,  often  in  conversation 
citing  instances  of  measures  being  carried  or  defeated  by  a 
thorough  debate." 

The  Senate  adjourned  from  March  sixth,  Friday,  to  Monday 
March  ninth.  On  Sunday  evening  Sumner  dined  at  Mr. 
Hooper's  in  company  with  Senator  Anthony  of  Ehode  Island 
and  Hon.  J.  B.  Smith,  a  colored  member  of  the  Massachusetts 
Legislature,  who  had  been  appointed  to  bring  to  Washington 
the  resolution,  rescinding  the  Legislative  censure  of  Sumner. 
It  was  rescinded  by  the  State  Senate  on  February  eleventh  and 
by  the  House  of  Representatives  on  February  thirteenth,  al 
most  unanimously.  Mr.  Smith  had  brought  the  resolution,  and 
a  beautifully  engrossed  parchment  copy  of  it  for  Sumner. 
Sumner  was  in  excellent  spirits  while  at  Mr.  Hooper's.  But 
after  retiring  that  night  he  had  an  attack  of  the  angina  pec- 
toris,  which  kept  him  awake  four  hours  and  necessitated  the 
call  of  his  physician  and  a  return  to  morphine  to  ease  the  pain. 

On  Monday,  March  ninth,  the  session  of  the  Senate  lasted 
only  a  few  minutes  and  then  adjourned  out  of  respect  for  the 
memory  of  ex-President  Fillmore,  who  had  just  died.  Sumner 
was  not  able  to  be  present.  On  that  evening  he  had  another,  but 
less  severe,  attack  of  his  disease,  when  his  physician  was  again 
sent  for  and  administered  remedies.  On  the  next  day,  Tuesday, 
March  tenth,  1874,  his  colleague  Senator  Boutwell  was  to 
formally  present  in  the  Senate  the  rescinding  resolution. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  715 

Boutwell  had  been  sick  for  some  days  and  hence  it  had  not  been 
done  sooner.  It  had  been  presented  in  the  House  on  March 
seventh  by  General  Butler,  in  Sumner's  absence.  But  it  was 
desired  that  he  should  be  present  when  it  was  presented  in  the 
Senate.  He  felt  better  on  the  morning  of  Tuesday,  chatted 
pleasantly  and  discussed,  with  his  guest  and  former  secretary, 
A.  B.  Johnson,  many  persons  and  events  "  always  in  a  kindly, 
genial,  pleasant  tone,"  while  he  waited  nearly  an  hour  for  his 
mail,  which  was  late.  He  went  to  the  Senate  against  the  advice 
of  his  physician. 

He  was  in  his  seat  about  12.30  p.  M.  when  Senator  Bout- 
well  arose  soon  after  the  Senate  convened  and  read  the  resolu 
tion,  formally  retracting  the  only  censure  that  had  been  passed 
upon  him  by  the  State  during  a  service  of  twenty-three  years. 
The  eyes  of  the  members  sought  him  as  the  resolution  was 
read,  but  in  his  face  there  was  no  sign  of  exultation  or  tri 
umph.  When  asked  the  evening  before  if  he  would  speak, 
he  answered :  "  The  dear  old  commonwealth  has  spoken  for  me 
and  that  is  enough."  But  underneath  a  silent  and  impassive 
extarior  there  was  a  deep  feeling  of  appreciation  of  this  act  of 
the  Legislature.  How  many  heart  aches  and  sad  misgivings, 
this  hasty,  passionate  and  ill-considered  resolution  cost  him, 
no  one  will  ever  know.  But  we  do  know  that  it  did  much  to 
hasten  the  break  down  of  the  already  shattered  health  of  this 
noble  servant  of  the  State.  The  presentation  of  the  rescinding 
resolution  was  the  last  act  of  the  Senate  in  which  he  partici 
pated. 

His  fellow  Senators,  and  others  present,  congratulated  him. 
He  went  to  his  colleague  Boutwell  and  affectionately  putting  his 
arm  around  his  neck,  inquired  after  his  health  and  as  he  arose 
to  leave  the  chamber  accompanied  him  to  the  door,  there 
bidding  him  "  Good-bye ".  He  met  Charles  Kingsley,  the 
English  novelist  and  divine,  who  was  on  a  lecturing  tour  in  this 
country  and  conversed  with  him  pleasantly.  It  was  their  first 
meeting  and  the  impressions  were  mutually  pleasant.  They 
talked  of  English  friends  and  acquaintances,  Gladstone  and  the 
Argylls.  Sumner  said  he  was  going  to  write  to  the  Duchess 
of  Argyll  the  next  day.  But  he  never  did.  Kingsley  wrote  in 
stead  to  tell  her  the  sad  particulars  of  the  end.  Sumner  spoke 
to  several  of  his  fellow  Senators ;  to  some,  of  the  Centennial 
Celebration,  of  the  resumption  of  specie  payments,  of  the  re 
scinding  resolution  and  the  kindness  he  had  enjoyed  during  his 
recent  vacation  in  Massachusetts;  and  to  others,  Mr.  Hooper 
among  them,  of  his  sickness,  of  his  feeling  of  weakness  and  of 
his  apprehension  of  another  attack.  While  he  was  still  speaking 


716  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

to  some  of  them,  he  experienced  pains  in  his  side  and  remarked 
about  them.  Mr.  Hooper  arranged  that  his  carriage  would 
come  to  the  Capitol  and  that  he  should  ride  home  with  him. 

During  this  session  of  the  Senate  and  the  one  of  the  Friday 
previous  when  Sumner  was  last  there,  he  was  greatly  worried 
over  a  complimentary  dinner  to  Baez,  the  San  Domingo  ad 
venturer,  that  was  being  arranged  for  in  Boston  by  Dr.  S.  G. 
Howe  and  others.  To  Mr.  J.  W.  Chandler,  who  had  dis 
cussed  it  with  him  on  each  occasion,  he  declared  himself  firmly 
against  it  and  expressed  the  wish  to  have  it  prevented. 
An  effort  was  being  made  by  Mr.  Chandler  to  gratify  him. 
There  was  an  earnest  conversation  of  some  length  about  it,  on 
each  occasion.  Baez  was  then  in  New  York;  and  the  dinner 
was  understood  to  be  in  furtherance  of  the  scheme  of  annexa 
tion.  It  was  never  held.  Sumner  left  the  Senate  Chamber,  at 
4.30  P.  M.,  according  to  appointment,  with  Mr.  Hooper,  in 
his  carriage.  As  he  went  out,  those  near  noticed  him  pause  and 
cast  his  eyes  around,  as  if  giving  a  long,  parting  look  upon  this 
scene  of  struggle  and  suffering  and  triumph,  that  had  filled  so 
large  a  place,  in  his  life. 

In  the  evening  he  entertained  Congressman  Henry  L.  Pierce 
and  Mr.  B.  P.  Poore  of  the  press,  both  of  Massachusetts,  at  his 
house  for  dinner.  Before  their  arrival  he  wrote  some  friends 
in  Boston,  to  interest  them  in  preventing  the  complimentary 
dinner  to  Baez  and  he  spoke  of  it  to  his  guests  when  they 
arrived  and  seemed  worried  by  it.  After  dinner,  the  two  friends 
remained  in  conversation  with  him  for  two  hours  and  then 
left,  Mr.  Pierce  being  the  last  to  go.  About  half  an  hour  after 
he  left,  the  servants  below  heard  a  noise,  in  his  chamber,  as  of 
some  one  falling  heavily  to  the  floor;  and  upon  going  imme 
diately  up,  they  found  him  lying  partly  upon  the  lounge  and 
in  great  agony. 

His  physician  Dr.  J.  T.  Johnson  was  at  once  sent  for  and 
he  came  promptly  with  his  brother  A.  B.  Johnson,  Sumner's 
former  secretary.  They  reached  the  house  about  nine  p.  M.  In 
the  meantime,  he  had  been  aided  to  his  bed ;  and  when  the  phys 
ician  arrived  he  was  lying  across  it  suffering  severely.  Mor 
phine  was  administered  hypodermically  to  ease  the  pain  and 
produce  sleep,  but  it  gave  no  relief  and  fifteen  minutes  later  the 
application  was  repeated.  This  afforded  temporary  relief  and 
at  the  request  of  Dr.  Johnson  he  retired  to  bed  and  soon  went  to 
sleep  and  slept  for  twenty  minutes,  when  he  awoke  again  with 
another  paroxysm,  more  violent  than  the  other.  He  exclaimed, 
"  Doctor,  this  thing  must  kill  me  yet,  and  it  might  as  well  be 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES   SUMNER  717 

now;  for  life  at  this  price  is  not  worth  the  having."  It  was 
now  near  midnight  and  the  physician,  becoming  alarmed  at  the 
violence  of  the  symptoms,  thought  it  prudent  to  call  in  others. 
His  friends  Mr.  Hooper  and  Mr.  Pierce  as  well  as  James 
Wormley,  who  lived  near,  were  summoned  and  Dr.  W.  P.  John 
ston  was  also  called;  and  they  soon  arrived,  Mr.  Wormley 
bringing  with  him  another  colored  friend,  G.  F.  Downing. 

After  another  injection  of  morphine  and  a  dose  of  brandy  and 
ammonia  he  seemed  easier,  and  at  two  o'clock  there  was  so  much 
improvement  that  his  friends,  except  Mr.  A.  B.  Johnson, 
thought  it  safe  to  retire  to  their  homes;  and  he  requested  Mr. 
Johnson  and  his  physician  to  go  to  bed,  assuring  them  that  he 
was  better.  The  others  complied  except  Dr.  Johnson,  who  re 
mained  with  him  all  night  watching  his  symptoms.  Towards 
morning  they  became  noticeably  worse.  He  was  very  weak, 
his  pulse  was  fast  disappearing  and  he  became  unconscious. 
About  six  o'clock  Mr.  Hooper,  Mr.  Pierce,  and  Mr.  Wormley 
returned  and  it  was  decided  to  have  a  consultation  of  phy 
sicians  and  Surgeon-General  Barnes  and  Dr.  Lincoln  were 
called  and  the  result  was  a  conviction  that  the  end  was  near. 

From  this  time  until  he  died  there  were  only  intervals  of 
semi-consciousness.  Dr.  Brown-Sequard  was  telegraphed  for 
and  word  of  his  condition  sent  his  sister  and  other  relatives. 
His  friends  Senator  Schurz  and  Congressmen  E.  Rockwood 
Hoar  and  George  F.  Hoar  heard  of  his  condition  and  came  at 
once.  Many  of  his  friends  and  associates  in  the  public  service 
called  during  the  day  to  tender  kindly  offices  and  before  them 
the  chaplain  of  the  Senate  in  the  library,  below  where  he  lay, 
read  passages  of  Scripture  and  offered  prayer,  as  he  did  also  in 
Sumner's  room. 

When  partially  aroused  certain  things  seemed  to  be  upon 
his  mind.  "  I  should  not  regret  this  if  my  book  were  finished," 
he  murmured.  And  again,  "  My  book,  my  unfinished  book !  " 
He  could  be  heard  to  murmur  the  words  "  Tired  ",  "  Weary  ". 
To  his  former  secretary,  Mr.  Johnson,  who  with  the  two  colored 
friends  were  changing  his  position  he  said :  "  You  must  be  very 
tired ;  but  you  can  soon  rest."  To  Judge  E.  R.  Hoar  who  was 
chafing  his  hands,  saying  he  was  trying  to  warm  them,  he  an 
swered  hopelessly,  "  You  never  will  ".  To  Mr.  Johnson  who  had 
lifted  him  up  and  had  his  arm  under  him,  he  said,  "  Don't  let 
the  bill  be  lost."  To  which  he  replied  "  Certainly  not " ;  when 
Sumner  answered:  "You  don't  understand  me:  I  mean  the 
Civil  Rights  Bill ; "  and  then  turning  to  Judge  Hoar  he  said ; 
"  Judge,  the  Civil  Rights  Bill ;  don't  let  it  be  lost— don't  let 
it  fail,  my  bill,  the  Civil  Rights  Bill ! "  About  noon  Schurz 


718  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

asked  him,  "  Do  you  know  me  ?  "  "  Yes  ",  he  answered,  striv 
ing  to  open  his  eyes,  "  but  I  do  not  see  you  ".  And  again  the 
words  were  murmured;  "  0,  so  tired!  0,  so  weary!"  As  the 
end  drew  very  near  he  said  to  Judge  Hoar,  a  neighbor  of  Kalph 
Waldo  Emerson,  "  Judge,  tell  Emerson  how  much  I  love  and 
revere  him  ".  And  the  Judge  answered,  "  I  will.  He  said  of 
you  once,  he  never  knew  so  white  a  soul."  He  was  a  little  later 
told  that  Mr.  Hooper  had  come  to  see  him.  He  motioned  him 
to  a  seat  and  said :  "  Sit  down."  These  were  his  last  words. 
He  soon  sank  again  into  unconsciousness,  the  heart  beats  grow 
ing  feebler;  for  six  hours  there  had  been  no  pulse  distinguish 
able  at  his  wrist ;  and  at  ten  minutes  before  three  o'clock  p.  M. 
he  passed  into  another  convulsive  movement  with  his  heart; 
and  the  end  was  over.  And  Charles  Sumner  was  dead. 
His  friend  and  former  secretary  Johnson  and  Dr.  Lincoln 
were  supporting  him  at  the  time,  Mr.  Downing  held  his  right 
hand,  Judge  Hoar  his  left;  and  as  he  laid  it  down  he  said, 
"  Well  done,  good  and  faithful  servant !  enter  thou  into  the  joy 
of  thy  Lord !  " 

"  As  I  stood  by  the  dying  bed  of  him  who  was  my  friend 
for  thirty  years,"  said  Judge  Hoar,  "  and  heard  the  repeated 
exclamation,  '  0,  so  tired !  0,  so  weary  ! '  the  old  hymn  of  the 
church  seemed  to  be  sounding  in  my  ears : 

"  '  Yes,  peace  !  for  war  is  needless; 
Yes  calm  !  for  storm  is  past  ; 
And  rest  from  finished  labor, 
And  anchorage  at  last." 

When  the  Senate  met  that  day  and  the  condition  of  Sumner 
was  known,  who  the  day  before  had  been  present  participating 
in  the  proceedings,  there  was  an  indisposition  to  do  any  busi 
ness  and,  on  motion  of  Sherman,  an  adjournment  was  taken  to 
the  next  morning.  The  Senators  gathered  in  groups,  receiv 
ing  word  of  his  condition  from  time  to  time  and  discussing 
the  impending  event.  The  House  continued  in  session  receiv 
ing  and  having  read  bulletins  giving  information  of  his  condi 
tion  and,  when  his  death  was  announced,  it  too  adjourned. 
By  a  coincidence,  that  did  not  escape  observation  among  his 
colleagues,  the  day  he  was  stricken  with  the  fatal  attack,  which 
ended  his  life,  was  the  anniversary  of  the  day,  when  three  years 
before  he  was  removed  from  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eela- 
tions. 

The  next  day,  in  the  absence  of  Senator  Boutwell  of  Massa 
chusetts,  on  account  of  sickness,  his  death  was  announced  in 
the  Senate  by  Senator  Anthony  of  Rhode  Island. 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  719 

"  It  is  an  event/'  he  said,  "  which  needs  not  to  be  announced, 
for  its  dark  shadow  rests  gloomily  upon  this  chamber,  and  not 
only  upon  the  Senate  and  the  Capitol,  but  upon  the  whole 
country." 

He  moved  that  a  committee  of  six  be  appointed  to  take 
charge  of  the  funeral  and  that,  in  consideration  of  his  long 
and  distinguished  services  to  his  country,  his  remains  be  re 
moved  to  Massachusetts  in  charge  of  the  Sergeant  at  Arms  of 
the  Senate,  attended  by  a  committee  of  six.  The  Senate  then 
adjourned  to  attend  the  funeral  services  in  the  Senate  Chamber 
at  12.30  p.  M.  the  next  day. 

The  announcement  of  his  death  was  made  in  the  House  by 
Judge  Hoar.  He  moved  that  a  committee  of  nine  be  appointed, 
who  with  the  Members  of  the  House  from  Massachusetts, 
should  accompany  the  remains  to  his  native  State. 

The  scene  at  the  residence  the  next  day  was  unusual.  No  rel 
ative  of  Sumner  was  there  but  the  house  was  filled  with 
mourners.  The  Massachusetts  delegation  with  their  families 
assembled  early  and  went  with  the  remains  to  the  Capitol.  A 
great  procession  of  colored  men,  headed  by  Frederick  Douglass, 
followed  the  hearse  and  after  them  came  the  committees  of 
Congress  and  the  immediate  friends  in  carriages.  The  re 
mains  were  deposited  in  the  rotunda  and  here  under  the  dome 
of  the  Capitol,  all  the  forenoon,  a  throng  of  many  thousands 
took  a  last  look  at  the  familiar  face.  Many  were  turned  away, 
however,  unable  to  get  near  on  account  of  the  press  of  the 
crowd. 

Promptly  at  12.30  P.  M.  the  body  was  removed  to  the  Sen 
ate  Chamber.  The  throng  that  had  already  assembled  there, 
the  President  and  his  Cabinet,  the  Supreme  Court,  the  Senate 
and  House  of  Representatives,  General  Sherman  and  Admiral 
Porter  the  heads  of  the  Army  and  Navy,  with  many  of  their 
subordinate  officers,  the  legations  and  their  families  and  the 
public,  that  crowded  the  great  galleries,  all  arose  at  the  an 
nouncement  of  its  coming  and  remained  standing,  while  it  was 
carried  to  the  place  reserved,  before  the  Vice-President's  desk. 
Here  during  the  service,  President  Grant  and  Secretary  Fish 
sat  at  the  head,  and  Senator  Schurz  at  the  foot,  while  the 
eyes  of  the  great  audience  wandered  from  him,  where  ho 
lay,  to  the  one  vacant  chair  now,  as  was  the  whole  chamber, 
heavily  draped  in  mourning.  The  services  were  brief.  The 
Chaplain  of  the  House  read  1  Cor.  xv,  22-28  and  offered  a 
prayer.  The  Chaplain  of  the  Senate  then  read  Psalm  xxxix, 
5-13  and  Psalm  xc  and  offered  further  prayer.  And  Senator 
Carpenter  then  President  pro  tern.,  committed  the  remains  to 


720  LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  Sergeant  at  Arms  of  the  Senate  and  the  committees,  to 
be  borne  to  Massachusetts.  They  were  accompanied  to  the 
Eailroad  Station  by  many  of  those  present. 

Of  these  services  Mr.  Blaine  wrote  that  they  "  were  marked 
with  a  manifestation  of  personal  sorrow  on  the  part  of  multi 
tudes  of  people,  more  profound  than  had  attended  the  last  rites 
of  any  statesman  of  the  generation — Abraham  Lincoln  alone 
excepted."  There  was  a  wealth  of  flowers.  Among  them  a 
cross  sent  from  the  White  House  by  the  daughter  of  the  Presi 
dent  and  a  magnificent  design  sent  by  the  little  Black  Eepublic 
of  Haiti;  but  what  would  have  touched  Sumner  most, — 
those  from  the  poor  colored  people,  in  profusion. 

Both  Houses  of  Congress  adjourned  until  after  the  burial. 

The  special  train  left  Washington  at  three  P.  M. 

When  the  train  reached  its  destination  it  was  met  by  a  multi 
tude  of  people.  Escorted  by  a  mounted  guard  of  honor  from  the 
First  Battalion.,  followed  by  a  long  procession  of  carriages  and 
people  on  foot,  to  the  State  House,  here  on  a  catafalque  in  the 
rotunda,  hung  with  the  torn  and  tattered  flags  of  the  conflict 
over  Slavery,  he  was  laid,  his  life-work  done  and  the  trust 
which  had  been  confided  to  him  by  his  State  ended.  As  the 
shades  of  Saturday  evening  were  gathering  in  the  great  hall, 
Senator  Anthony  advanced  to  Governor  Washburn  and  said : 

"  May  it  please  your  Excellency :  We  are  commanded  by  the 
Senate  to  render  back  to  you,  your  illustrious  dead.  Nearly  a 
quarter  of  a  century  ago,  you  dedicated  to  the  public  service  a 
man  who  was  even  then  greatly  distinguished.  He  remained 
in  it,  quickening  its  patriotism,  informing  its  counsels,  and 
leading  in  its  deliberations,  until,  having  survived  in  continu 
ous  service  all  his  original  associates  he  has  closed  his  earthly 
career.  With  reverent  hands  we  bring  to  you  his  mortal  part, 
that  it  may  be  committed  to  the  soil  of  the  renowned  com 
monwealth  that  gave  him  birth.  Take  it;  it  is  yours.  The 
part  which  we  do  not  return  to  you  is  not  wholly  yours  to  re 
ceive,  nor  altogether  ours  to  give.  It  belongs  to  the  country, 
to  mankind,  to  freedom,  to  civilization,,  to  humanity.  We 
come  to  you  with  the  emblems  of  mourning,  which  faintly 
typify  the  sorrow  that  swells  the  breasts  which  they  cover.  So 
much  we  must  concede  to  the  infirmity  of  human  nature.  But 
in  the  view  of  reason  and  philosophy  is  it  not  rather  a  matter 
of  high  exultation  that  a  life  so  pure  in  its  personal  qualities, 
so  high  in  its  public  aims,  so  fortunate  in  its  fruition  of  noble 
effort,  has  closed  safely,  without  a  stain,  before  age  had  im 
paired  its  intellectual  vigor,  before  time  had  dimmed  the  luster 
of  its  genius !  " 


LIFE   OF   CHARLES  SUMNER  721 

"  May  it  please  Your  Excellency :  Our  mission  is  completed. 
We  commit  to  you  the  body  of  Charles  Sumner.  His  undying 
fame  the  Muse  of  History  has  already  taken  into  her  keeping." 

The  Governor,  in  reply,  addressed  the  committee  briefly. 

In  the  rotunda,  the  remains  lay  in  state  until  Monday  after 
noon,  guarded  by  a  company  of  colored  soldiers.  During  this 
time  the  assembled  city  and  its  visitors  passed  through  the 
hall  to  view  the  face  that  had  so  long  been  familiar.  During 
Saturday,  while  the  train  that  bore  him,  was  threading  its  way 
to  his  old  home,  a  public  meeting  was  held  in  Faneuil  Hall  at 
which  short  commemorative  addresses  were  made  by  leading 
citizens,  A.  H.  Eice  and  William  Gaston,  both  afterwards  Gov 
ernors  of  Massachusetts,  General  Banks,  Edward  E.  Hale, 
Eichard  H.  Dana  Jr.,  James  B.  Smith  and  others  and  letters 
were  read  from  Charles  Francis  Adams  and  Henry  Wilson. 
During  Sunday,  his  life  furnished  the  theme  for  many  of  the 
sermons  of  the  country.  On  Monday,  Boston  was  draped  in 
mourning,  the  bells  tolled,  the  flags  in  the  city  and  harbor  were 
at  half  mast  and  business  was  suspended.  Everywhere  there 
was  evidence  of  sorrow.  At  three  P.  M  the  remains  were  re 
moved  from  the  State  House  to  the  King's  Chapel,  the  old  stone 
church,  with  associations  of  colonial  days,  where  for  many 
years  he  and  his  family  had  worshipped.  Here  the  pastor,  Eev. 
Henry  W.  Foote,  read  appropriate  passages  of  Scripture,  prayer 
was  offered,  Montgomery's  hymn,,  "  Servant  of  God,  well  done  " 
was  sung,  other  music  was  rendered  and  the  brief  service  was 
ended. 

The  long  procession  to  Mt.  Auburn  Cemetery  moved  over 
the  bridge  to  Cambridge,  passed  the  homes  of  Story  and  Long 
fellow  and  the  College  and  Law  School,  and,  as  the  sun  was  just 
disappearing,  reached  the  grave,  where  in  the  gathering  twilight 
the  Lord's  Prayer  was  said,  a  choir  of  forty  male  voices  sang 
the  inimitable  "  Integer  Vitae  "  and  "  A  mighty  fortress  is  our 
God",  the  pastor  pronounced  a  benediction;  and  all  that  was 
mortal  of  Charles  Sumner  was  at  rest. 

By  the  grave  stood  Longfellow,  Whittier,  Emerson  and 
Holmes,  and  his  associates  in  public  life,  Vice-President  Wil 
son,  Speaker  Blaine,  Schurz,  Anthony,  Sherman,  Hooper,  Hoar 
and  Pierce.  No  one  of  kin  was  there,  but,  as  the  coffin  rested, 
two  ladies,  one  of  them  the  daughter  of  Julia  Ward  Howe, 
approached  and  placed  upon  it  a  wreath  and  a  cross,  the  offer 
ing  of  the  only  surviving  member  of  his  father's  large  family, 
his  sister  Julia. 

The  grave  is  in  a  secluded  spot  near  the  boundary  of  the 
cemetery  farthest  from  the  main  entrance.  It  is  on  the  south- 


722  LIFE   OF   CHARLES   SUMNER 

west  slope  of  the  hill  which  originally  was  called  by  the  stu 
dents  of  Harvard  "  Mt.  Auburn,"  and  which  afterwards  gave 
its  name  to  the  cemetery.  From  the  top  of  this  eminence  is 
had  a  fine  view  of  the  surrounding  country  and  of  the  Charles 
River,  of  which  Longfellow  wrote : 

"  River  that  stealeth  with  such  silent  pace 
Around  the  City  of  the  Dead,  where  lies 
A  friend  who  bore  thy  name  and  whom  these  eyes 
Shall  see  no  more  in  his  accustomed  place, 
Linger  and  hold  him  in  thy  soft  embrace 
And  say  good  night." 

The  grave  is  now  marked  by  a  granite  monument,  bearing  his 
name,  erected  by  the  people.  Beside  it  are  the  graves  of  his 
family  and  near  by  the  visitor  sees  to-day  those  of  Agassiz 
and  Felton,  and  a  little  farther  off  those  of  Story,  Longfellow, 
Holmes,  Choate,  Hillard  and  Channing. 

Perhaps  no  member  of  either  House  of  Congress  was  ever 
followed  to  the  grave  by  such  a  wealth  of  eulogy.  He  was  a 
great  orator  himself  and  had  always  been  generous  in  eulogy 
of  his  dead  associates.  It  was  therefore  natural  that  his  death 
should  make  an  impression  upon  men  of  this  stamp,  that  would 
find  its  expression  before  the  public.  The  State  of  Massachu 
setts  and  the  City  of  Boston  each  held  a  commemorative  serv 
ice;  at  the  former  George  William  Curtis  and  at  the  latter 
Carl  Schurz  delivered  the  oration.  The  one  was  published  in 
full  in  Harper's  Weekly  and  the  other  bv  the  New  York  Tri 
bune.  They  were  both  able  and  generous  tributes,  and  deserve 
to  be  classed  with  the  best  funeral  orations  in  our  language. 
A  special  commemorative  service  was  held  by  the  New  York 
Chamber  of  Commerce  and  another  by  the  Legislature  of  Mass 
achusetts.  Longfellow,  Whittier  and  Holmes  each  commemor 
ated  him  in  a  poem.  The  press  of  the  whole  country  recognized 
the  loss  as  a  National  one  and  united  in  generous  praise  of  the 
dead  Senator.  It  was  commented  on  by  many  of  the  papers  of 
Great  Britain  and  by  some  in  France  and  a  sketch  of  his  life, 
with  a  portrait,  was  printed  in  one  in  Stockholm.  Extracts 
from  the  English  estimates  were  collected  by  the  London  cor 
respondent  of  the  New  York  Tribune  and  were  republished  in 
an  article  of  his  own  to  his  home  paper. 

But  of  all  the  tributes,  those  of  his  associates  in  public 
life  were  the  most  discriminating  and  contain  the  best  estimates 
of  his  character.  They  knew  him  intimately,  saw  his  life  and 
his  work  closely  and  speaking  before  the  country  and  in  the 
presence  of  one  another,  they  spoke  carefully.  They  do  not 
attempt  to  conceal  that  they  saw  defects  in  his  character.  But 


LIFE  OF  CHARLES  SUMNER  723 


there  was  a  generous  acknowledgment  of  his  great  work  and 
the  loss  his  death  was  to  the  Senate  and  to  the  country.  Who 
ever  was  first  in  other  fields  of  statesmanship,  the  pre-em 
inence  of  Sumner  on  the  slavery  question  must  always  be  con 
ceded."  They  testified  to  his  official  integrity,  the  purity  of  his 
private  life,  his  ability,  his  industry,  his  deeply  affectionate 
nature,  his  strong  religious  faith.  ..;•••' 

They  dwelt  upon  the  gentleness  and  kindliness  of  his  disposi 
tion  during  these  last  months,  no  unkind  word  for  his  old 
antagonists,  only  a  longing  for  peace  and  harmony,  and  the 
spirit  of  charity.  And  why  should  it  not  be  so? 
day's  work  was  ended,  derided,  scoffed  at  and  denounced,  borne 
with  stern  patience  through  the  noontide  heats,  it  at  last  had 
triumphed.  There  remained  no  forum  where  its  justice  was 
debated  and  no  home  so  lowly  that  it  could  not  reach.  As 
the  shadows  gathered,  he  could  easily  cover  up  the  animosities 
of  the  past  and  look  forward,  with  a  cheering  hope,  to  t 
future. 


INDEX 


Abbott,  Josiah  G.,  452. 
Adams,   Chas.    F. — 

An  Anti-Slavery  Whig,  184,  5,  9, 
191. 

Retires   from   contest  with   Win- 
throp,   204. 

Friendship  for   Sumner,   212. 

Discussed  for   Senator,   223. 

Announces  for  Sumner,  225. 

Serenaded,   233. 

Voted  for   Senator,   452. 

Retires    from     Eaglish    Mission, 
634. 

At   Funeral,    721. 
Adams,    John    Quincy — 

A   Whig   Leader,    99,    115,    116. 

Hears   Sumner's   Oration,   163-6. 

An     Anti-Slavery     Leader,     182, 
239. 

His  Motto,  212. 

His  Funeral,  214. 
Alaska,  Purchase  of,   575,   582. 
Allen.  Chas.,  191,  207. 
Allston,    Washington,    65,    105,    116, 

165. 

Ames,   Adelbert,   628. 
Andrew,    John    A.,    151,    184,    292-3, 

397,   400,  454. 
Annexation    of    San    Domingo,    650- 

673. 

Appleton,  Nathan,  113,  206. 
Argyll,   Duchess   of,   Letter,   612. 
Arlington,  Snmner  opposes  Return  of 

to  Lee,   649. 
Arnold,  Isaac  N.,  523. 
Aiken,  William,  306. 
Aix-les-Bains,    379. 
Ashley,   James  M.,   592. 
Ashmun,   Professor,   22-4. 
Assault    by    Brooks,    330-3. 


B 


Baez,    President,    650. 

Baker,   Senator,  Eulogy  on,   421-2. 


Bancroft,    George,    115,    138,    209. 

Banks,   N.   P.,   227,   306. 

"  Barbarism     of     Slavery,"      Speech, 

377-394. 

Bartlett,    Sidney,    232. 
Bachelder,    Jas.,    283-4. 
"  Battle  Flag  Bill,"  690-700. 
Bell,   John,   397. 
Benton,    Thos.    H.,    217,    239. 
Bigelow,    John,    234. 
Bingham.  John  A.,  329,  330,  595-7. 
Bingham,  Senator,  Eulogy  on,  420-1. 
Elaine,    Jas.    G.,    Letter    to    Sumner, 

688. 

Blair,    F.    P.,    344. 
Boutwell,     Geo.     S.,     227,     704,     714, 

715. 

Bowen,   Henry  C.,   544. 
Breckenridge,      Senator,      395,      397, 

421-2. 

Brewster,    Sir   David,   65-6. 
Bright,    Jesse   D.,    312,   431. 
Bright,    John,    358,    368,    696. 
Brooks,    Preston    S. — 

Sketch    of,    329. 

Lays  in  wait  for  Sumner,  330. 

Assaults    him,    330-3. 

Congressional   Action  on,   334. 

Resignation  and  Re-election,  336. 

Criminal   Punishment  of,   336. 

Challenges   Wilson,   337. 

Challenges    Burlingame,    337. 

Death    of,    340. 

Recalled  by  Elaine,  688. 
Brougham   Hall,   64. 
Brougham,   Lord,  63,   80,'  81,  358-9. 
Brown,   John,   308. 
Brown,    John    W.,    13,    SO,    400. 
Brown-Sequard.  Dr.,  375,  377-9,  382, 

697,    715,    717. 

Brown,    Thos.,    30,    66,    67,    68. 
Bryant.  Wm.  Cullen,  267,  338,  400. 
Buckingham,    Edgar,    141. 
Buchanan,  Jas.,  339. 
Buckalew,   Senator,   569. 
Bulwer,    Edward    G.,    53. 


725 


726 


INDEX 


Burlingame,       Representative,       337, 

397,    400. 

Burns,    Robert,    161. 
Burns,   Anthony,  283. 
Burritt,  Elihu,   170. 
Butler,    Benjamin,    596,    715. 
Butler,    Fanny    Kemble,    135. 
Butler,    Senator,   287-8,   296,   315-17, 

320,    322-4,    328,    334-6,    341. 


Carlyle,    Thomas,    54,    67,    68. 

"Caroline,    The,"    123. 

Cass,    Lewis,    41,    80,    81,    191,    193, 

196,   217,   240. 
Caucus  Rules,   574-575. 
Censure    of   Snmner,    701-3. 
Chandler,     P.    W.,    150.       , 
Channing,   Wm.   P.,    125. 
Channing,    Wm.    E.,    117,    118,    119, 

165. 

Channing,  Walter,  188. 
Chase,    Salmon    P. — 

Chm.  Free-Soil  Convention,  193. 

On    Compromise,    217. 

Urges  Sumner  for  Senator,  226. 

Early   Anti-Slavery,   239. 

Sumner's  visit  to,   302. 

Death,  704. 

Chestnut,    Senator,    394. 
Chester,  visits,  368. 
Chevalier,    Michael,    353. 
Child,  Linus,  185. 
Chinese   Indemnity  Fund,  633-4. 
Choate,  Rufus,  25,  100,  115,  207,  245, 

349,  384. 

Civil   Rights   Bill,   675-8,   699. 
Clay,  Brutus  J.,  302-3. 
Clay,  Cassius  M.,  302-3. 
Clarke,  J.  F.,  188,  702,  708. 
"Clarke  Propositions,"   403. 
Clay,  Henry,  99,   130,  216-17,  247. 

303. 

Cleveland,    H.    R.,    31,    206. 
Cobb,   Howell,   217. 
Cole,   Senator,  577. 
Collamer,    Senator,   312,   553. 
Cogswell,    J.    G.,    96,    109. 
"  Compensated  Emancipation,"  434-7, 

456-7. 

Compromise  of  1850,  216. 
Cobden,   Richard,  210. 
Conversation,      Daniel      Webster     on, 

632. 
Corwin,  Thos.,  99,  190-4,  217. 


Cornwall,    Barry,    55. 
Cottenham,    Lord    Charles,    52. 
Cotton  Crop  during  war,  458. 
Cowan,    Senator,    539,    551. 
Cowdin,   Eliot  C.,  351,   709,   711. 
"  Craigie  House,"   111-12. 
Crawford,    Thos.,    85,    87,    91,    104, 

105-6,    351. 

"  Crittenden   Propositions,"   402-5. 
Crittenden,  Senator,  332. 

Creole,   The,"   124. 
Crouzet,    Dr.,    379-381. 
Curtis,    Benj.    R.,    595,    598. 
Gushing,   Caleb,   228,   426,   452,   712- 

13. 

Cushman,    II.    W.,    227. 
Gushing,   L.   S.,   27,  28,   135. 
Cutler,    B.    C.,    109. 
Custom    House    Oaths,    386. 


Dana,   R.   H.,   Jr.,  233,  255. 

Davis,    Jefferson,    395. 

Davis,  Henry  Winter,  503,  505. 

Davis,    John,    265. 

De  Grey,   Earl,  644. 

Denman,   Chief   Justice,   47,  48,   50. 

De  Tocqueville,  Alexis,  173,  352. 

Dexter,   Franklin,   101,   115. 

Divorce,     584-5. 

Disraeli,   Benjamin,   90. 

Dix,    John    A.,   408. 

Douglas,    Stephen   A. — 

On    Compromise,    217. 

Kansas-Nebraska     Debate,     276, 
326. 

Sketch  of,  313. 

Sumner   answers,   317,   321,   324. 

Attacks  Sumner,  315,  326. 

Sumner  answers,  316,  327-8. 

Against    Democrats    on    Kansas, 
371. 

Nominated    for    President,    397. 

Dedication    of     his     Monument, 

562. 

Drayton  and  Sayres,  250. 
Dunlap,     Adam,     28-9. 
Dunrobin  Castle,   363. 
Dwight,   Louis,    172,    176. 


Eads,   Jas.    B.,   459. 
Edmundson,     Representative,     330-2, 
341. 


INDEX 


727 


Education,  Sumner  on,  571. 
Eldredge,   J.   S.,    189. 
Eliot,    S.   A.,    172,    176. 
Elsworth,    Oliver,    259. 
Emancipation,     The     Issue,     411-17, 

419,   423-4,   482-7. 
Emerson,    Ralph    Waldo,    47,   54,    97, 

400,    718,    721. 
Estimate  of  Sumner,  338. 
Enlistment  of  Colored  Soldiers,  453. 
Engravings,   Study  of,  372-3. 
English  Bar,  48,  61. 
English    Interference    in    War,    458- 

464. 
Eulogy  on   Lincoln,   520-2. 

on  Rantoul.  248-9. 

on   Bingham.   420-1. 

on   Baker,  421-2. 

on    Collamer,    553. 

on    Foot,    553. 

on    Stevens.    617. 

on  Fessenden,  617. 

on    Greeley,    698. 

on    Davis,    698. 
Eulogies   on    Sumner,   722-3. 
Evarts,   Wm.   M.,   338,   591.   595,  598. 
European      Trips,      32-96,      349-369, 

374-383,    694-7. 
Everett,   Edward,   99,   163,   166,   279, 

349,    405. 

Exmouth,  Lord,   161. 
Fay,    Theodore    S.,    92,    93. 


Felton,   C.   C.,   31,   97,    111,   167. 

Ferguson,    Sir    Adam,    66. 

Fessenden,  Senator,  433,  546,  550, 
582,  617. 

Field,    David    D.,    193,    467. 

Fillmore,  President,  pardons  Dray- 
ton  and  Say  res,  250-1. 

Fish,  Hamilton,  241,  613-615,  658, 
667,  719. 

FItzwilliam,  Lord,  53,  73,  210. 

Fletcher,    Richard,    33. 

Foelix,  J.  J.  G..  41. 

Foot,    Senator.    553. 

"  Foreign  Relations,  Our,"  Speech. 
467-9. 

Fox,  Chas.  James,  610,  611. 

"  Franco-Prussian  War,"  Lecture  on, 
648-9. 

Free-Soilers,  Growth   of,   285. 

Freedmen's    Bureau,    501-2. 


French,    Interference    in    War,    461- 

462. 

Fremont,   John   C.,   339,   352. 
French   Spoliations,    489. 
French    Arms'    Investigation.    678. 
Frost,    B.,    13. 
Fugitive  Slave  Law,  262-5,  286,  296- 

7,   245-8,   475-8. 
Funeral   of   Sumner,    718-721. 
Furness,   J.   T.,   344,   347,  691. 
Furness,    W.    H.,   344,   347. 


"  Gag  Rule,"  285. 

Garner,    Margaret,    475. 

Garrison,     Wm.     Lloyd,     126-7,     158, 

254. 

Gaston,   Judge.   30.  500. 
Gerando.    Baron    de,    41,    42. 
Gerry.    Elbridge.    359. 
Giddings.    Joshua    R.,    124,    192,    193, 

213,    224,    250.    314. 
Gladstone,   Wm.   E.,  358,  359,  368. 
Gigli,    Signor.    87. 
Goethe,  Johann  W.,   161. 
Gordon,    Capt.    J.    R.,    380. 
Gould,  Benjamin,  8. 
Grant.     TT.     S.— 

Appointed     Secretary     of     War, 

594. 
Report    on    Condition    in    South, 

539. 

Elected    President.    605-611. 
Aporoves    Sumner's    Position    on 
Alabama   Claims   against   Eng 
land,   642. 

Seeks    Annexation    of    San    Do 
mingo,   654.    etc. 

Sumner's  Speech   against,  683-6. 
Gray,  F.  C.,   174. 
Gray,   John   C.,    190. 
Greeley,    Horace,    451.    688.    691. 
Greene,  Geo.  W..  84,  89.   210. 
Greenough,  Horatio,  87.  104. 
Groesbeck    Wm.    S..    505.    598. 
Greenleaf  Professor,  24-5.  28,  33,  55, 

100. 

Guizot,    F.    P.   G..    42,  353. 
Gwin,   Senator,  577. 


Halo,   John   C.,   289.   266.   302. 
Hallam,    Henry,    r>5.    361. 
Harrison,    Wm.    II.,    98. 


728 


INDEX 


Harvard  College,   145-7. 

Harvey,  Jacob,   126. 

Hayden,   Wm.,    189. 

Heidelberg,  visit  to,  93. 

Henry,   Patrick,   324. 

llillard,   Geo.   S.,   27,   28,  31,   53,  54, 

56,   99,    111,   158,  206,   219,   707. 
Hoar,   Geo.    F.,    717. 
Hoar,  E.  Rockwood   192,  717,   718. 
Hoar,    Samuel,    191. 
Holkham   House,   visit  to,   71. 
Hopkins,  Erasmus,  451. 
Hopkinson,  Thos.,   13,   18. 
Home,   Removal    from   Old,    588-9. 
Home,    Purchase  of  New,   589. 
Holt,     Joseph.     408. 
Howe,     Samuel,     G. — 

Sumner's    early    Friendship    for. 
103.   109.  110. 

Interest  with,  in  Popular  Educa 
tion.   130. 

In  Prison  Discipline,  139,  171. 

Candidate    for    Congress,    184. 

Result.  187. 

Friendship,   209. 

Goes  to  Canada,  384. 

For  Minister  to  Greece.  610. 

In     San     Domingo     Controversy. 

694,    716.      , 
Howe,    Julia    Ward,    109,    110,    702. 

163. 

Hunt,    Leigh,    53. 
Humboldt,  Alexander  von,  92.   ' 
Hutchens,  Wells  A.,  487. 
Hyatt,  Thaddeus,  385. 


Impeachment      of     .Tobnson.      r>92-5. 

600-4. 

Ingham,    Robert,    61,    104,    210,    362. 
Irving,  Washington,  114. 


Kansas-Nebraska     Trouble,     276-28.1. 

307. 

Keitf,     Representative,     330-3,     341. 
Kemble,    Fanny,    135. 
Kent,    James,    25,    138. 
Kent.    Wm.,    163.    179,    211. 
Kenyon.    John,    210. 
King.   Preston,    193. 
Know-Nothing    Party,    294,    305. 
Kossuth,    Louis,    242. 


Lafayette,   Lecture  on,   400. 

Lake  Champlain,  Excursion  to,  13. 

Lane,   Senator,  431-2. 

Lamar,  Representative,  395. 

Law   Reporter,   Contributes   to,   138. 

Lawrence,   Abbott,  207. 

Leader,    Wm.    J.,    333. 

Leavitt,    Joshua,    226. 

Leverett,   L.   P.,   8. 

Liberal  Republican  Movement.  680. 

Lieber,    Francis,    25,    30-1,    56,    103. 

Lincoln,    Abraham — 

Nomination  for  President,  397. 

Election    of,    399. 

Sumner   urges   Emancipation   on, 
413-14. 

Favors    Compensated    Emancipa 
tion,   434-7. 

Proclamation     of     Emancipation 
issued.    448-9. 

On     English     and     French     Atti 
tude.   459-460. 

Sumner's    Intimacy   with.   473. 

On    Southern    Union    Men.    494. 

His  Trio   to  City   Point,   516-17. 

Assassination   of.   518. 

Sumner's,  Eulogy  on,  520-2. 
Lincoln,    Levi,    9. 
Lindsley,    Dr.    Harvey,   343. 
Lockhart,  J.  G.,  53. 
London.  In  46,  72,  95,  357,  361,  383. 

695-6. 
Longfellow    Henry    W. — 

Sumner's    Early    Friendship    for, 
31.    104.    111.    112-4. 

Unbroken  by   Politics.   206-8. 

Spends    night    after    Election    to 
Senate  with  him,  234. 

Regrets  at  Separation.   238-9. 

Later  Friendship,  702,  706,  721, 

722. 
Lyman,  Joseph.  233. 


Macaulay,    Thos.    P...    54,    358. 
Makenzio.    Alexr.    Slidell,    128-130. 
Mann,   Horace.    130.   250.   302. 
Marriage   of    Sumner.    557-8. 
McDowell,  Jas.  F.,  487. 
McLean.   Judge,    194. 
Martineau.  Harriet,  361. 
Mason,    Alice, 


INDEX 


729 


Mason,  Jas.  M.,  425. 

Mason,   Jei-emiah,  -115. 

Mason,   Senator,   324;,  326-8,   335-G. 

Metcalf,    Theron,    28. 

Metternich,    Prince,    91. 

Mexican    War,     Opposed    to,     148-9, 

181,  188. 
Mittermaier,    Professor,    35,   94,    104, 

105,  210. 
"  Monograph     from     an     Old     Note 

Book,"   470. 

Montpellier,   Residence   at,   379-381. 
Morpeth,  Lord.  W,  70,  104,  105,  114, 

125,    210,    366-7. 
Morris,   Gouverneur.   259. 
Morga'n,    Representative,    332. 
Motley,  John  Lothrop,  613,  615,  643, 

696. 

Morris.  Robert.  177. 
Murat,   Madame,   42. 


N 


Norton,   Mrs.   Caroline,  76,  96.   358. 

NapoleonV  160. 

Nasby,    Petroleum    V..    516,    677. 

National    Banks,    Taxation    of,    489. 

Nelson,   Homer   A.,'  '487. 

Nelson.    T.    A.    R  .    595. 

New    Bedford    Lyceum.    158. 

New  England  Society  of  N.  Y.  Toast. 

709-711. 
New  England  Emigrant  Aid  Co.,  318- 

320. 

Northcote,   Sir  Stafford,  644. 
-      ' 


Oregon   Boundary    Dispute,    148. 
Owen,    Robert    Dale,    502. 


Palfrey,  John  G.,  150,  157,  189,  204, 

224,  234. 

Paris.     Visits     to,      37-45,      350-355, 
1    3T5-6,   695-6. 
Parkes,    Joseph,    210. 
Parker;   Theodore,    188,   384. 
Parsons,  'Tn'eo'., ;  28. ! 
Penitential^'  a't  Mettray,  356. 
Penri.   William.    143: 
Perry.  Dr.  M'aVslial  S..  343,  347. 
Phillips,    S.'  C,,    185,    223. 


Phillips,     Wendell— 

At    Latin    School,    8. 

Opposes  Texas  Annexation,   157. 

As  a  Lecturer,  188. 

Approves  Sumuer's  Speech,  291, 
451. 

Befriends    Sumner,    705. 
Phillips,  Willard.  28. 
Pickering,  John,  3,  162,  163. 
Pierce,   Edward  L.,  502,  708. 
Pierce,    Franklin,    309. 
Polk,   James  K.,   130. 
Poor.    Rear-Admiral,    652,    653. 
Poore,  Ben.   Perley,  654. 
Postage.   Advocates  Cheaper,  631-3. 
Powers,   Hiram.   87. 
Prison    Discipline,    Interest    in,    139, 

etc. 
Prescott,   Wm.  H. — 

Commencement     of     Friendship, 
56. 

Dines  with.  97,  105. 

Their     Intimacy,     113-115,     138, 
'   211,  384.     ' 

Dissents     from     Peace     Theory, 

151. 
Proclamation  of  Emancipation,  448- 

9. 

"  Prophetic    Voices,"    Article,    585. 
Purchase  of  New  Home,  589. 
Putnam,    Samuel,    162. 


Quincy,  President,  33,  103,  163. 


Rand,  Benjamin,  24. 

Ranke,    Leopold;    92. 

Rank>ul,  Robert.  Jr..  227,  248. 

"  Rebellion,  its  Origin,"  etc.,*  Lecture, 

447-9. 

Reception  at  Boston,  347-8. 
Reception  proposed  at  Paris,  354. 
Reconstruction.—— 

'State     rebellion,     State     suicide, 

432. 

In   West   Virginia,   492. 
Generally,   492-7,1  502-514,   566- 

570. 

Reeder,    A.    M.,    309. 
Republican     Party,'  'Organization    of, 

292,    396,    399. 

Republic  without   Religion,   Doubtful, 
696.  i 


730 


INDEX 


Resumption      of      Specie      Payments, 

630. 

Removal  from  Old  Home,  588-9. 
Revels,    Senator,    628. 
"  Rights  of  Sovereignty,"  etc.,  Speech, 

441. 

Rockwell,    Julius,    285-6. 
Rogers,   Samuel,   53. 
Rome,    visits   to,   82-6,    381. 
Rose,   Sir  John,  643. 
Rouen,  visit,  350. 
Russell,     Earl,    461,    465,    469. 
Roberts,    Sarah    C.,    177. 

S 

Sanborn,    F.    B.,    385-6. 
San    Domingo,    Opposes    Annexation. 

650. 

Savigny,  F.   K..  92.  155. 
Schurz,    Carl,    539.   679,   722. 
Scott,    Archdeacon,    62. 
Scott,  Sir  Walter,  53,  64,  66,  69. 
Sedgwick.    Theodore,    109. 
Segar,  Joseph,  508. 
Seward,    Wm.    H. — 

On   Compromise,   217. 

Early   Anti-Slavery,   239. 

Does  not  Vote,  265. 

Hostility   of   England,   460. 

Purchase  of  Alaska.  572,  577. 

Contemplated     Purchase     of     St. 

Thomas,   582. 
Seymour,    Lady,   76,   96. 
Seymour,   Horatio,   408. 
Sharp,   Granville,   294. 
Shannon,   Governor,   210—212. 
Shaw,   Col.    Robert   G.,   454. 
Sherman,    John,    311.    476-7,    9,    488. 

507-9,    626.    604,    688,    721. 
Sixth    Mass.    Regiment,    411. 
Slavery,   Character  of.   390-4. 
Slidell,  John,  128-130,  312,  332,  425. 

470. 

Smith,  Benj.  and   Franklin,  515. 
Smith.    Sydney,   60.   67. 
"  Somers  Meeting."   128. 
South    Carolina.    323-4. 
Sparks.  .Tared,   115. 
Spencer.   John    C.,    128. 
Spencer,     Philip,     128. 
Stanberry,   Henry,  595,  597. 
Stanton,   Edwin  M. — 

Appointment   to  Cabinet,   408. 

Refuses   to   Resign,    593. 

Removal.    594. 

Commission,    599. 


Stanton,   Henry  B.,   158. 
Stephens,    Alexander    H.,    494. 
Stevens,   Thaddeus,   595,   597.   617. 
Stewart,   Alexander  T.,   613-14. 
Stockton,  John  P..  549.  550. 
Stearns,    J.    F..    13.    20. 
Story.    Joseph — 

Father's    Friend,    3. 

Early  Friendship.  22,  23,  24,  25, 
30,   35.    47.    100. 

Gives  Employment.  29,  102.  132. 

Letters    to.    40.    43,    49,    55,    61. 

Secures  Publisher  for,  56. 

Friction    Match    Case,    100. 

Letter     on     Municipal     Oration, 
152. 

Death,   153. 

Siimner's    Tribute,     154. 

Habits,   160,   162. 
Story,  Wm.  W..   100.   115.  697. 
Suffrage,    499,    546-8,    567-570. 
Supreme   Court.   Recollection   of,  497. 
Sumner,    Albert.    1.   108,   135. 
Sumner,   Alice  M..  557-8,  584-5. 
Sumner.    Charles — 

Birth,   1. 

Father,    12-15,    82. 

Mother.   5-6,   555-7. 

Family,    1-6. 

Youth,  7-10. 

In  Latin   School.  8. 

In    Harvard   College,    11-17. 

Prizes,    15,    19,    20,    22. 

Studies  Law,  20-25. 

Excursion    to    Lake     Champlain, 
13-14. 

Law   Librarian,   21. 

Visits    Washington,    25. 

Little  attracted  to  Women.  26. 

Ilillard   &  Sumner,   Partners,  27. 

Edits   "  Jurist."   27-8.    138. 

Edits   "  Admiralty   Practice."  28. 

Teaches  in  Law  School,  29,  132, 
157. 

Montreal,  30. 

Eu rone,   32. 

Studies    French.    38. 

French    Trial,   43-5. 

Paris,    37-45,    80. 

London.   46-57.    72-8,   95. 

On   Circuit,   57-72. 

Oxford,  73. 

Cambridge.    73. 

Fox    Hunt.    73-6. 

Parliament,   77-8. 


INDEX 


731 


Rome,  82-6. 
Death    of    Father,    82. 
Venice,  87. 
Heidelberg,    94-5. 
"  Sumner's  Reports,"  99. 
Social  Life,   119-121. 
Somers   Mutiny,    128-130. 
Edits  "  Vesey  Jr.",  132. 
Sickness,    132-5. 

Friction    Match    Case,    100,    137. 
^Prison    Discipline,    139. 
"  True    Grandeur     of     Nations," 

140-153. 

Appearance,    142. 
Tribute  to  Judge  Story,  154. 
Opposes     Annexation    of    Texas, 

157. 

Opposes   Slavery,    158. 
"  Employment     of    Time,"     159- 

161. 

"  White    Slavery,"    159-161. 
Tribute  to  John  Pickering,  162. 
Phi  Beta  Kappa  Oration,   163-7. 
As  an  Orator,  167-8. 
((Universal    Peace,    140-153,    169- 

170. 

Prison  Discipline,  171,  etc. 
Equal    School    Privileges,    177-8. 
Law  Practice,   179. 
Lyceum    Lecturer,    179. 
Mexican    War,    181. 
Delegate    to    Whig    Conventions, 

184,  189. 

Favors   new   Party,   190-3. 
Attends      Free-Soil      Convention, 

103. 

Ratification  Meeting,  194-5. 
Free-Soil  Campaign,  195-6. 
Nominated  for  Congress,  196- 

202. 

Loss   of   Friends,    203-212. 
New   Friends,    212-14. 
"  Five  of  Clubs,"  205. 
Taste   for   Music,   209. 
European     Correspondence,    210. 
Edits  his   Speeches,   214. 
"  Our     Immediate     Anti-Slavery 

Duties,"    221. 
Attacks     Fugitive     Slave     Law, 

221-3. 

Candidate  for  Senator,   223-232. 
Elected,    232. 
First   News,   233. 
Goes    to    Longfellow's,    234-5. 
Accepts,    236. 


Regrets      at      Leaving      Boston, 

237-9. 

Benton's   Prediction,    239. 
Reception  in  Washington,  241-2. 
Speaks  on  Reception  of  Kossuth, 

242-5. 

Iowa    Land   Bill,   246. 
Eulogy   on   Rantoul,   248-9. 
Pardon    for    Drayton    &    Sayers, 

250-1. 
Seeks     to     Speak     on     Slavery, 

252-7. 
Speech      "  Freedom,      National," 

257. 
Against     Fugitive     Slave     Law, 

262-5,   286.   475-6. 
His    Egotism,    267. 
Free-Soil  Convention,  268. 
Massachusetts         Constitutional 

Convention.   270-5. 
Repeal   of  Missouri   Compromise, 

276-8. 

Midnight   Speech,   281-3. 
Threats   of   Violence,   283-4. 
Abuse  of,   287-8,   315-16.   326. 
Talks   back,    289-290,    316. 
Speaks    to     Republican    Conven 
tion,    292-3,   305. 
Literary    Recreation,    294-5. 
"  Anti-Slavery  Enterprise,"  299- 

302. 

Visits    West   and    South,    302-5. 
"  Crime    against    Kansas,"    316- 

qoo        ,/' 

>^  \ 

Assa-tffted  by  Brooks,  330-3. 
Injuries,  333,  342.      \ 
Congressional   Action,   334-5. 
Resignation    and    Re-election    of 

Brooks,    336. 
College   Degrees,   345. 
Reception   at  Boston,  347-8. 
Second  Election,  348-9. 
Visits    De    Tocqueville.    360-1. 

Harriet  Martinean,  361. 

Dunrobin    Castle,    ,'363. 

Teddesley   Hall,  367. 

Stafford,  367. 
.    Hawarden,  368. 
Study    of    Engravings,    372. 
Submits    to    Moxa,    375. 
Rome    and    Turin,    381. 
On    Foreign    Relations    Commit 
tee,   386,   409. 
"  Barbarism    of    Slavery,"    387- 

394,   399. 
First   Lincoln  Campaign.   398. 


732 


INDEX 


As  an   Orator,   399. 
Lecture    on    Lafayette,    400. 
Firmness    at    opening    of    War, 

404-9. 
Threatened    by    Baltimore    Mob, 

410. 

Slavery,  the  issue  in  War,  411-5. 
*4  Rebellion,'  'Its     Origin,"  >  "etc., 

417-19. 

"Trent  Affair,"  425-9. 
Mason   and    Slidell,   425-9. 
Leader  in   Senate,  430,'  552,  569. 
Reconstruction,    432-3,    537-9. 
Emancipation,   411-5,   434,   439- 

441,    442-3,    448-451,    482-7, 

504. 
Compensated  Emancipation,  434- 

7,  456.'  '•'  ! 

Ambassadors    for   Haiti   and    Li 
beria,  437-8. 
Slave   Trade,  '438-9,   474. 
To  Free  Slaves  of  Rebels,  439. 
Legal    Tender   Notes,    443.  '' 
Third  Election,  446-7,  452. 
Enlistment    of    Colored    Troops, 

453. 

Shaw  Memorial,  454. 
Our  Foreign  Relations,  464-7. 
Intimacy  with  Lincoln,  473,  514. 
Slavery  and  Freedom  Committee, 
:   474>     3!ul  : 

Persistency,  478. 

Civil  Service  Bill,  479-480. 

Colored   "Witnesses,    481. 

Elqual    Pay  :if or   Colored   Troops, 

:    488.   >  "' 

French   Spoliations,  489. 

Opposes  Tax  on  Banks,;  489. 

Supreme   Couri;   497,'  S499. 

Suffrage,  499/504;  610-^1,  567-8, 

625.  ' 

Freedmen's  Bureau,  501,  etc. 
Disc-barge   of    Smith    Bros'.,   515. 
At   Richmond,  513-7.    '' 
Assassination  of  Lincoln,  518-19. 
Eulogy   on   Lincoln,   520-2. ; 
Relations"    with  '  Jobnson,     524. 

559,      534-5,      540-1,      545-<J, 

600-3. 

"Equal  Rights  for  All,"  542. 
Senator    StocktotV,    550. 
Viva    Voce    Ballot    for   Senators, 

550. 

Death  of  Mother,  555. 
Marriage,    557-8. 


"  One   Man   Power   against   Con 
gress/'    559:  ' 

On   Education,   571-2,   573. 

Rules    of   Caucus,    574. 

Purchase  of  Alaska,   575-582. 

Divorce,    584-5. 

"  Prophetic    Voices,"    585. 

"The  Nation,*'  586-8.  • 

His  Fortune^  589. 

Habits,    590-1;'   • 

Impeachment,   600-3. 

Opposes  'Repudiation,  605-7. 

For  Grant,  608-610,  646.  " 

Fourth   Election, ''632. 

Motley  and  Fish,  613-16. 

Eulogies    on     Stevens   :and    Fes- 
senden,  617. 

Edition  of'  Works,  619. 

"Question   of  Caste,"   621. 

"  Equal   Rights,"   622-3,   626-7. 

Opposes     'Southern      indemnity, 
623-4. 

Resumption,  607,  630. 

Opposes  'Income  Tax,1  630. 

Opposes  Tariff  on  Books,  631. 

Cheaper  Postage,  631-3. 

JohnsOn-Clarendon   Treaty,   635— 
640. 

Opposes   Annexation   of  San   Do- 

''riTtingo,   656-664,   672. 

Removal     from    his     Committee, 
663-670. 

Medal    from    Haiti,    674. 

Speech  against  Grant/  683-6. 

Advises    Colored    Voters   to   sup 
port   Greeley,   688.:    ' 

Letter  of  Blaihe,!688. 

His  Answer,  688-9. 

Speech  for  Creeley^  690. 

His   Will,   690^-1. 

Nominated  for  Governor  and  de- 

'   clines;  694. 

London   and   Paris,   695. 

Visits    Jobn    Bright,  ''696. 

Battle   Flag   BH1,   699-700. 

Censured,  701--3:         :)    '     ' 

Last    Summer,    705-8. 

Toast  before  New  England  Soci 
ety,    N.    Y.,    709-}711.     ' 

Last  Days  in  Senate,'  711-715. 

Last   Sickness   and* 'Death,    716- 

:    718.- 

Funeral,   718-721. 

Eulogies,    722-3. 
Snmner,    Charles   P.,    12-15,   82. 


INDEX 


'33 


Sumner,  Edwin  V.,  1,  10. ; 

Su inner,   George,   1,   106,   131,   204-5, 

268,    34.3,  ;  .400-1. 
Sumner,    Henry,    1.          ,t 
Sumner,    Horace,    1,    120. 
Sumner,    Increase,    1. 
Sumner,    Jane,    1. 
Sumner,   Job.   2,   120. 
Sumner,  Julia,  1,  108,  109,  112,   135, 

721. 

Sumner,   Matilda,   1,  24. 
Sumner,   Mary>    1,   108,   109,    135-7. 
Sumner,   Relief  Jacobs,   5-6,   555-7. 


Talfourd,  Tbos.   N.,  67,   68,   69. 
Taney,  Chief  Justice*   497-9. 
Taylor.  Zacbariah,   191,   196. 
Teddesley    Hall,    367.. 
Tenure  of  Office  Law,  563-6, 
Texas,  Annexation  of,  127,  130,  180. 
"The  Three  Graces,"  109. 
Threats  of  Violence,  283-4,  .395. 
"The  Nation,!'  Lecture,  586-8. 
Thomas,   Lorenzo,   594. 
Thiers,    L.    A.,   42. 
Tichnor,  Professor  Geo.,   16,  41,  115, 

204,    208. 

Thibaut,  Professor,  94,  155. 
Tilden    Samuel  ij.,    193. 
Tindal,    Chief    Justice,    51,    59. 
Toombs,    Senator,   332. 
Toucey,   Bill,   296-7. 
Tower,   C.,    13,   18. 
"Trent   Affair,"   425. 
Trumbull,   Senator,   314,  679. 
Tyler,  John,  207. 


Van   Buren,    Martin.   98,    193-4,    196. 
Vallandigham,   C.   T.,    408. 
Vattemare,   Alexr.,   353. 
Voorhees,    Daniel   W.,   487. 
Von    Humboldt,    Alexr.,    160. 


Wade,  Senator,  596. 
Walker,  Amasa,  170. 
Ward,  Julia  R.,  109. 
Ward,  Julia  (Howe),  109,  110,  163. 

702. 

Ward.   Samuel,   109,  134. 
Washburn,   Elihu  B.,  614. 
Washington,   George,   143. 


Washington,  Treaty  of,  644-5. 
Wayland,    Francis,   172,   174. 
Webster,  Daniel — 

Hears(  his  Eulogy  on  Adams  and 

Jefferson,   19. 

In   "  Harrison  Campaign,"  99. 
Friendly  Help,  ,100. 
Estimate   of   Hedging,    116,    125, 

189,   191. 

Marvelous   Presence,   185. 
His  Estimate  of  Van  Buren  as  a 

Free-Soiler,    193-4. 
Seventh   of   March   Speech,   216- 

220. 

Webster,    Fletcher,    185. 
Webb,    Seth,    Jr.,    224.  - 
Wentworth   House,   70,   72.  : 
Wharncliffe,    Earl,    70,    210. 
Whewell,    Professor,    210. 
Whittier,   John   G.— 

Urges      Sumner      for       Senator, 

224-5. 
Congratulates     him,     235,     186, 

275,   291. 

Campaigns  for  him,  451. 
Seeks  Repeal  of  Censure,  702. 
Commemorates  him,  721-2. 
Wilde,    Thos.,    59v 
Willis,    N.    P.,    96; 
Windsor   Castle,   Visits,   72. 
Williams,  J.   M,,   188. 
Wilson,  Vice-President—      ; 

Bolt's     Nomination     of     Taylor, 

191,   207. 
Friendship,   213. 
In  Election  of  Sumner  t'o  Senate. 

227,    ,233,    235. 

Nominated   for  Governor,   293. 
Elected  to   Senate. 
Elected    Vice-President. 
Friendship       unbroken,        706-7, 

721. 

Williamson,   Passmore,   304. 
Wilson,   James   F.,   592. 
Winthrop,    Robert    C.,    8,     150.     1(57, 
181,   188,   190,   203,   216,   220,   227, 
232,  349. 

Witherell,   Sir  Charles,  49. 
Witnesses,   Colored,  481. 
Wright,    E.,    188. 

Wordsworth,     William      (poet),      65, 
116. 


Young  Men's  Republican  Union,  467. 


14  DAY  USE 
14  DAY  USE 

RETUKN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below, 
or  on  the  date  to  which  renewed.  Renewals  only: 

Tel.  No.  642-3405 

Renewals  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  date  due. 
Renpyed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


LK.-'i 


'JUL  5    1972 


INTER-LIBRARY 


LOAN 


AH/C      DEC  17  1974 


General  Library 

LD2lA-40m-8,'71  University  of  California 

(P6572slO)476-A-32  Berkeley 


M94889        f  ^ 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


